***************************************************************** 09/07/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.214 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY 1 AFP: Iran-Europe nuclear deal not within reach - European diplomat 2 Globe and Mail: Don't let Iran go nuclear 3 AFP: Britain to press North Korea to come clean on nukes - Blair 4 JoongAng Daily: Seoul to send officials to IAEA in Vienna 5 Xinhuanet: China hopes new round of six-party talks could be held as 6 Xinhuanet: China hopes ROK nuclear experiment problem solved 7 Asia Times: Nuclear genie out of S Korean bottle 8 Japan Times: No laughing matter in South Korea 9 Scotsman.com: Nuclear Weapons: Blair's 'Very Clear' Message to North 10 news24: Nuclear 'black market' probed 11 news24: Uranium plant 'highly unlikely' 12 JoongAng Daily: Nuclear arms and romantic daydreams 13 iafrica.com: sa news Atomic energy inspectors in SA 14 Daily Times: New take on AQ Khan nuclear ‘whodunit’ 15 Expatica: The Dutch role in shady nuclear deals NUCLEAR REACTORS 16 US: NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; In the Matter of System 17 Guardian Unlimited: There is an alternative 18 Guardian Unlimited: Investors try to block BE rescue 19 Daily Yomiuri: KEDO project work bar to be extended 1 yr 20 Daily Yomiuri: KEPCO opens Mihama reactor to press 21 Daily Yomiuri: Mihama reactor's B pipes breached rules 22 The Herald: British Energy holds to its plan 23 US: NRC: State of Utah: Discontinuance of Certain Commission Regulat 24 TheStar.com: Plant more than hot air 25 US: NRC: State of Utah: Final Determination on Proposed Alternative 26 US: NRC: Entergy Operations, Inc., Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2; Not 27 HeraldNet: Children of Chernobyl 28 US: Reuters: UPDATE 2-American Electric to sell Texas plant stake 29 US: NRC: License No. SNM-2509] Trojan 30 US: Newsday.com: Opponents say Indian Point nuclear plants make resi 31 Expatica: France's nuclear threat 32 UK Independent: Cover-up claim over report on nuclear power dangers 33 Sofia Morning News: Bucharest Slams Bulgarian "Chernobyl" Plant 34 US: NRC: Tennessee Valley Authority; Notice of Withdrawal of Applica 35 US: NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; In the Matter of Dominio 36 US: NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; In the Matter of Exelon NUCLEAR SAFETY 37 US: [DU-WATCH] Dennis Kyne - gulf veteran & anti-du campaigner 38 US: Argus Online: Resource center opens for sick nuclear workers 39 Guardian Unlimited: Meacher rails at 'biased' cancer report 40 US: Anchorage Daily News: Weapons workers' benefits cause infighting 41 Daily Star: Depleted uranium's deadly poison 42 ENN: New UNEP report warns of threats to unique Arctic ecosystem 43 US: Times-News: Paying the price? Idahoans could join nuclear 'downw 44 US: Times-News: Government ignored public health warnings during fal 45 US: Times-News: Test shot in 1952 hit Idaho hardest 46 US: PISJ: Ex-resident: Bomb test fallout gave her cancer NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 47 US: NRC: NRC Releases York, PA., Site for Unrestricted Use 48 AFP: Iran about to renounce efforts to enrich uranium 49 EUPolitix.com: EU eyes new nuclear package 50 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca court ruling set to take effect 51 US: St. Petersburg Times Online: Acidic spill tops 41-million gallon 52 UK Independent: Iran's offer to stop enriching uranium falls flat NUCLEAR WEAPONS US DEPT. OF ENERGY 53 Penn State Live: Professors receive $1.35 million Department of Ener OTHER NUCLEAR 54 Google News Alert - nuclear ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 AFP: Iran-Europe nuclear deal not within reach - European diplomat http://www.spacewar.com/ad-bin/spacewar-logo-380.gif" LONDON (AFP) Sep 07, 2004 An agreement aimed at getting Iran to renounce its efforts to enrich uranium is still some way off, a European diplomat told AFP on Tuesday, contradicting earlier reports of an imminent deal. "The Iranians have in their normal way just before the pressure really gets too much.. come with another offer," the diplomat said on condition of anonymity. Western diplomats in Vienna earlier said Iran was ready to renounce its efforts to assemble centrifuges to enrich uranium and that an agreement with the leaders of Britain, France and Germany appeared imminent. The report came less than a week before a key meeting of the board of governors of the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on September 13 to review Iran's nuclear program. But the diplomat in London said that Tehran had skirted around the most sensitive issues. "We are not close to a deal," he warned. "They have told the IAEA board... that they were re-suspending some of their activities (but) they did not choose to suspend the key thing, which is uranium enrichment," he said. "They didn't look at the uranium conversion facility. They are explicitly continuing with that and they just offered one or two other things which were pretty minor. "It just looks like they are offering something so that when it comes to the board next week they are able to tell us that they have done something to try to meet us half-way," he added. He also stressed that Tehran's proposal had been made to the IAEA, not to Britain, Germany and France, which have reportedly been negotiating for three days to persuade Iran to suspend all uranium enrichment activities. A Foreign Office spokesman declined to comment, saying: "We will have to wait and see what this means in the IAEA board, which is meeting on Monday." All rights reserved. © 2004 Agence France-Presse ***************************************************************** 2 Globe and Mail: Don't let Iran go nuclear [http://www.globeandmail.com] Tuesday, September 7, 2004 - Page A16 The latest troubling news on Iran's burgeoning nuclear program should finally be enough to persuade the international community that it's time to rein in the authoritarian regime's ambitions before it acquires the capacity to deploy horrifying weapons in an already volatile region. A new report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reveals that Iran stated its intention in June to process more than 40 tonnes of raw uranium into uranium hexafluoride, which, when sufficiently enriched, would produce enough nuclear fuel for up to half a dozen nuclear weapons. At a lower level of enrichment, it can also be used to produce power, which Iran insists is its only purpose. That would be more believable if Tehran had not consistently flouted international rules and reneged on previous promises. Or if the IAEA, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, had not also discovered that the Iranians were buying the designs for advanced centrifuges needed to make weapons-grade fuel nearly a decade ago. Although the report doesn't name the supplier, it turns out that it was none other than Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear-weapons program and a busy entrepreneur who counted North Korea and Libya among the eventual recipients of his illegal technology exports. When it emerged two years ago that Iran had been concealing its nuclear activities for nearly two decades, in defiance of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the matter should have gone straight to the United Nations Security Council, which is supposed to police such cheating and has the authority to impose sanctions. But despite pressure from the Bush administration, the IAEA has yet to make the necessary referral. The European governments and Russia have been extremely reluctant to confront Iran, partly because they don't want to jeopardize lucrative business ties and partly because of what happened in Iraq. The failure to find any nuclear, biological or chemical weapons in Iraq has had the unfortunate fallout of making the international community extremely skittish about calling Iran to account. With Iraq in mind, Britain, France and Germany struck a compromise. They would defer calling in the Security Council if Iran stopped enriching uranium and started co-operating fully with international inspectors. The watchdog agency says the Iranians have been more co-operative, even to the point of providing advance warning that they were removing the agency's seals on equipment used to make centrifuges at three nuclear plants, in violation of an earlier commitment. Tehran continues full speed ahead on the enrichment front, secure in the belief that it can escape penalties by making promises it doesn't intend to keep and offering up the occasional bone, such as improved access for inspectors. Through all this, Iran continues to insist that its program is designed only for the purpose of producing nuclear power. But its track record makes it tough to accept this on faith. If, for instance, Tehran's only goal is developing another source of electricity so it can export more of its oil, why did it reject a European proposal to provide sufficient nuclear fuel to run the country's reactors and to remove all the waste, in exchange for an undertaking to abandon nuclear development? And why, for that matter, did Tehran recently test a missile with a range of 1,300 kilometres? Taking all this into account, the IAEA's board should stop stalling and refer the matter to the Security Council when it meets Sept. 13. The rift over Iraq must be set aside, business considerations must be ignored and Iran's militant theocracy must be put on notice that the international community will not stand by as it develops the capacity to wreak havoc in the Middle East and endanger the rest of the world. ***************************************************************** 3 AFP: Britain to press North Korea to come clean on nukes - Blair [http://www.spacewar.com/] [http://www.spacewar.com/] LONDON (AFP) Sep 07, 2004 Britain intends to send "a very clear message" to North Korea that it must enter into serious dialogue about its nuclear programme, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Tuesday. Blair's remarks came as Foreign Office minister Bill Rammell will later this week become the first British minister to visit Pyongyang to discuss nuclear weapons and other issues. Britain first established diplomatic relations with the reclusive Stalinist state in December 2000. "I think it is important to send a very clear message to North Korea about the priority we attach to North Korea getting into a proper dialogue, which means that we deal with the nuclear arms issue in relation to North Korea," Blair said during a press conference at Downing Street. "We do this without any doubts or illusions about the nature of the regime in North Korea, how it treats its own people, and the programs that we think they are engaged in," he said. "But I think it is important to reinforce that message and that is why a junior minister is going there," he said. "Do I think it will work? I don't know. You will have to ask me that when he comes back," he said. During his mission, Rammell will also raise the issue of human rights abuses in talks with North Korean ministers. He is due to North Korean Foreign Minister Paek Nam Sun and other senior figures. Rammell said last month he would press North Korea over its apparent quest for nuclear weapons, a crisis which began in October 2002 when the United States accused Pyongyang of operating a secret nuclear programme based on enriched uranium. Several rounds of talks involving North Korea and the United States along with China, Japan, Russia and South Korea have failed to break the deadlock. North Korea has been ruled for the past half-century by father-and-son dictators Kim Il-Sung and Kim Jong-Il. Its exact human rights record is very difficult to gauge since the bulk of the country is completely sealed off to foreigners. But rights groups and defectors say thousands of political prisoners are detained in often appalling conditions, while widespread executions, torture and forced labour are also reported. All rights reserved. © 2004 [http://www.afp.com/] . Sections of ***************************************************************** 4 JoongAng Daily: Seoul to send officials to IAEA in Vienna September 8, 2004 South Korea's foreign and science ministries said they will send a delegation of officials to the International Atomic Energy Agency's 48th Board Meeting from Sept. 13 to 16 in Vienna. With the recent revelations that South Korean scientists succeeded in uranium separation experiments in Jan. 2000, Seoul plans to explain to the UN agency officials the circumstances surrounding the incident. "We intend to explain our basic position on the matter and seek understanding from officials there," said a Foreign Ministry source. Last week, South Korea revealed that a group of scientists had produced a small amount of uranium in "academic" experiments. IAEA inspectors left Korea with a sample of the enriched uranium. 2004.09.07 Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use | ***************************************************************** 5 Xinhuanet: China hopes new round of six-party talks could be held as scheduled www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-09-07 21:03:23 BEIJING, Sept. 7 (Xinhuanet) -- All involved in six-party talks onthe Korean Peninsula nuclear issue should be restrained, calm and strive to solve the issue in a peaceful and practical manner. Onlyby doing so, can the new round of talks be held as scheduled. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan made these remarksat a regular press conference here Tuesday. Kong said there have always been difficulties in the six-party talks. Now, only through the concerted efforts of all sides will the fourth round of talks be held before the end of September, which was agreed by all the parties in the previous round of talks. ˇˇ He said that China has been trying to play a constructive role in pushing forward the six-party talks. It is China's hope that other parties will be patient and practical and transcend all existing obstacles to hold the new round of talks on the scheduled time. China, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the United States, the Republic of Korea, Russia and Japan, already met for three previous rounds of talks in Beijing. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 Xinhuanet: China hopes ROK nuclear experiment problem solved www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-09-07 20:44:50 BEIJING, Sept. 7 (Xinhuanet) -- China hopes the Republic of Korea (ROK) could cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to solve its nuclear experiment problems, said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan on Tuesday. China received messages from both the ROK and the agency saying that the IAEA had already wrapped up its investigation in ROK, Kong said at a regular press conference. Kong said China wishes the issue would not hamper the scheduling of the fourth round of six-party talks about the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue. The working group meeting should be held before the end of September. There have already been three rounds of discussions in Beijing involving China, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the United States, the Republic of Korea, Russia and Japan. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 7 Asia Times: Nuclear genie out of S Korean bottle [http://www.atimes.com Korea By Ehsan Ahrari In this age, when nuclear nonproliferation is receiving global popularity, it might be hard to realize that developing nuclear weapons still retains its status as the proverbial prohibited apple among a number of countries. Nations know they are not supposed to develop them, yet they are so tempted to push the envelop to the edge by attempting to develop weapons-grade uranium, just in case. Such endeavors may be viewed as stopping short of developing nuclear weapons, or keeping the indigenous knowledge honed enough for future reference. The latest surprise related to the South Korean nuclear program falls in this category. This was also a violation of the international agreement that Seoul signed not to enrich uranium for nuclear power. The recent disclosure from South Korean that its nuclear scientists secretly enriched uranium to nearly bomb-grade levels in experiments was treated in Washington as a surprise. It was a surprise in the sense that the United States did not expect such behavior from its ally at a time when it is trying to persuade North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program. At the same time, given the technical sophistication acquired by the South Korean scientists through their training in the United States for peaceful uses of nuclear energy, it should not be a surprise. There were trained by the best in the business, and were expected to test the outermost limits of their capabilities. Having nuclear knowledge and not being tempted to use it for developing nuclear weapons is like living near brothels and remaining celibate. Sooner or later, the temptation will triumph over all good intentions. What is also troubling is that Seoul disclosed the nature of its nuclear activity on August 23, when confronted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) under mounting suspicion. The official position is that "it was a one-time experiment conducted without government authorization and it was geared toward the country's nuclear energy program". Ironically, "without the authorization or knowledge of the government" was also an explanation offered by Pakistan in explaining the rogue activities of Dr A Q Khan (who sold nuclear technology to other states and almost sold it to Iraq), in the realm of global nuclear proliferation. South Korea also stated that it enriched only a tiny amount of uranium. Needless to say, the IAEA would not accept Seoul's words, and wants a complete explanation - and scrutiny of its nuclear activities. The question should be asked: why South Korean scientists ventured into the forbidden territory of developing enriched uranium, which takes them so close to developing nuclear weapons? Three reasons quickly come to mind: 1) The neighborhood-related variable: The East Asian neighborhood has four actors - China, Japan, Taiwan, and North Korea - that either have nuclear weapons or nuclear weapons-related know-how. China is one of the five officially recognized "nuclear weapons states" (Britain, China, France Russia, US - the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council). As such, Beijing's nuclear arsenal, combined with its repertoire of ballistic missiles, is undergoing sustained qualitative and quantitative advancement. Even though the People's Republic of China and South Korea are not adversaries, that reality should not be a sufficient reason for South Korea not to consider developing nuclear weapons. Russia and the United States are no longer adversaries, yet neither has shown any inclination even to drastically reduce their nuclear inventories. The United States, the United Kingdom, and France are allies, yet all have their own nuclear forces. So, by extending the preceding argument, the friendly ties between South Korea and the PRC has no bearing on the temptation of the former to eventually have its own nuclear arsenal. Taiwan: Taiwan (Republic of China, ROC) and Japan already have sufficient nuclear know-how to develop their own nuclear weapons within six months to a few years. Even in the 1980s, two American nuclear nonproliferation specialists, Leonard Spector and Joseph Yager, wrote about the possibility that Taiwan sought a nuclear or "near nuclear option". In 1998, two other specialists, David Albright and Corey Gay, wrote that the ROC explored nuclear capabilities in the aftermath of the PRC's nuclear tests in the 1960s. Taiwan's rationale, according to these authors, was based upon its leadership's thinking that the US nuclear force could not be relied on to deter military moves from the mainland. America played a crucial role in pressing Taiwan not to develop the nuclear option. In 1966, the US again intervened to ensure that Taiwan's nuclear reactors "included IAEA safeguards to prevent diversion from materials into nuclear weapons". Then, in 1972-73, Washington "discouraged the ROC from purchasing from West Germany a reprocessing facility that could have created the impression that Taiwan intended to acquire nuclear capability". In 1997, a highly placed Central Intelligence Agency spy in Taiwan's nuclear development program played a key role in forestalling another attempt by that country to develop nuclear weapons. Despite these endeavors, it is generally understood that Taiwan possesses nuclear weapon know-how. Whether or when it pursues a weapons option has a lot to do with the America's role in ensuring that the PRC will not put into action its often iterated position of using all means, including military action, to reunite Taiwan with the motherland. Japan: It is a well-known fact that Japan has the technological know-how to produce nuclear weapons. The People's Daily reports that Japanese Liberal Party chief Ichiro Ozawa made a claim on April 6 to a visiting Chinese delegation that, "In the event of China's excessive expansion, Japan would make nuclear weapons to 'curb' China; the plutonium of Japan's nuclear power plant can fully turn out more than 4,000 nuclear warheads ... " Even prior to Ozawa's statement, former prime minister Hata Tsutomu told reporters, "Japan does have the ability to possess nuclear weapons." In July 1995, a Japanese magazine, Hoseki Gem, reported a statement by an unnamed Japanese politician, saying: "Japan can produce atom bomb within 183 days." People's Daily correctly assesses Japan's nuclear know-how by pointing out that it possesses: + "World's first-rate nuclear energy technology"; + "Multiplication reactor technology that has all along been the key and [resolves] difficult points in nuclear technology research"; + "Super-strong computer simulation nuclear blasting capability"; + "Extremely high-level nuclear warhead-carrying technology"; and that Japan; + Is "actively exploring new technology for obtaining nuclear raw materials"; + "Stores astonishing nuclear raw materials," and that by 2010, "Japan's gross plutonium reserves will reach 100 tons, thus making it the world's number 1 country with the largest plutonium storage." North Korea: North Korea is a country that, by all estimations, has either developed somewhere between 1-20 nuclear weapons, or, is on the verge of doing so. It has already revoked its commitment to the Nonproliferation Treaty and created a bad precedent for future wannabe nuclear powers to attempt to emulate. However, even to this day, North Korea's emergence as a nuclear power may not have attained the status of irreversibility. That is why the six-nation dialogue - comprising North and South Korea, China, the United States, Japan, and Russia - is still alive, and may lead to a negotiated solution of this conflict. 2). The prestige factor: Even though specialists on nuclear nonproliferation have spent a lot of time discussing the security-related aspirations of a country as the primary driving force in developing nuclear weapons, the prestige factor has also played a prominent role. Why else would the United Kingdom and France continue to possess nuclear weapons? Even during the heady days of the Cold War, their nuclear arsenals were no match for the awesome nuclear capabilities possessed by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Today, the "suspected total nuclear weapons" of France and Great Britain are listed at 464 and 185 respectively, according to reliable sources. It could be argued that the real deterring force vis a vis the former USSR (suspected total nuclear weapons around 10,000) was the equally awesome arsenal of the United States (suspected total nuclear weapons around 10,500). Equally important, Washington was quite serious about implementing the doctrine of "extended deterrence", which included, inter alia, guaranteeing the security and survival of France and the UK against a Soviet nuclear attack. There is no doubt that, from the US vantage point, having a nuclear-armed France and UK was a good thing, since even their comparatively small nuclear arsenal could not have been then ignored by Moscow in its own strategy of nuclear retaliation. Today, neither France nor the UK has shown any inclination toward unraveling their nuclear weapons, for that remains the only status symbol for them to maintain a semblance of "great powers". South Korea seems to be tempted by a similar feeling, recognizing fully that its chances of becoming a nuclear power are well nigh impossible. Still, the prestige variable could not have been ignored by the top leadership in giving a wink and a nod to its scientists to proceed with their technical endeavors to process uranium. Seoul will not develop its nuclear weapons; however, its nuclear scientists have established the fact they can, if they must. 3) Giving a message to North Korea: There is little doubt that North Korea has taken note of this much publicized action of South Korean nuclear scientists. In this sense, it is possible that Seoul wanted to send a message to its northern neighbor that it too can match Pyongyang's capabilities. However, it is doubtful that such a message would have much of a constraining effect on North Korea. Kim Jong-Il's commitment to develop nuclear weapons is driven by his resolve of not becoming the next victim of regime change, if US President George W Bush is re-elected. Washington is rightly concerned that North Korea "would use the revelations to its advantage." It should be noted, however, that unless the United States comes through with sufficiently strong guarantees against regime change in North Korea, along with a hefty economic package, any potential development of nuclear weapons by South Korea is not likely to play much of a role in influencing Kim Jong-Il one way or another. Ultimately, South Korea's romancing with the nuclear option is a minor blip in terms of its potential damage to the six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons. What was important for South Korea was to signal to its regional competitors - Japan and Taiwan, to be sure - that it too belongs in the "big league" of wannabe nuclear powers. As long as the United States' commitment to South Korea's security remains firm, there is no chance that Seoul would seriously consider the option of acquiring nuclear weapons. At the same time, Washington must also make sure that Japan does not develop its own nuclear weapons. If that were to happen, the US government would have a tough time persuading South Korea why it should not also have its own nuclear weapons, especially if North Korea remains armed with such weapons. Ehsan Ahrari is an independent strategic analyst based in Alexandria, Virginia. (Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 Japan Times: No laughing matter in South Korea Tuesday, September 7, 2004 EDITORIAL Reports that South Korean scientists secretly -- and unbeknown to the government -- conducted experiments to enrich uranium are another blow to the nuclear nonproliferation regime. News of the tests is proof that nuclear standards have to be toughened and that the Additional Protocol needs to become mandatory for Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) signatories. Most importantly, Seoul must fully disclose what happened four years ago, and end all doubts and suspicions about the country's nuclear program, capabilities and intentions. Two weeks ago, Seoul notified the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that scientists working at a government laboratory had enriched uranium to amounts far beyond the levels needed for energy production. According to Seoul, four years ago scientists used lasers to enrich less than a gram of uranium. The government said that it was a one-off experiment, using equipment that was intended for other purposes, and which was subsequently destroyed because of radioactive contamination. The government first became aware of the experiment in June and reported it to the IAEA last month. International nuclear inspectors have already visited South Korea to look into the claims and will continue their investigation. Seoul denies that it has or had a nuclear-weapons research program or a uranium-enrichment effort. One South Korean nuclear expert said other experts "would probably laugh" at claims the experiment was a step toward building nuclear weapons. No one is laughing. The ramifications of this development are very disturbing. Even if there was no intent to build a weapon, the tests are likely to have violated South Korea's obligations under the NPT and the 1991 North-South Joint Declaration on a denuclearized Korean Peninsula, which included a pledge not to enrich nuclear fuel. North Korea is likely to use the news to justify its own nuclear-weapons program. Although North Korean statements that it intends to develop such weapons differentiate the two situations, Pyongyang could argue that its neighbor's experiments justify a similar uranium-enrichment program. That will make progress in the six-party talks increasingly difficult. At a minimum, the IAEA will have to make a full report on the experiments and should take the case to the United Nations Security Council, as is required by any violation of NPT commitments. Anything less will open the door to charges of discrimination by Pyongyang and discourage North Korea from making a full disclosure of its nuclear efforts. Iran is also alleged to possess a clandestine nuclear program, of which uranium enrichment is a key component. Like Seoul, Tehran denies that it has nuclear-weapons ambitions. Again, a failure by the IAEA to sanction Seoul for its tests would give Iran the opening it needs to pursue its own nuclear efforts. Plainly, Seoul has to be as transparent as possible, providing the IAEA with all information, thereby setting an example for other nations and precluding any charges of discrimination on the part of the U.N. agency. Anything less than full cooperation and disclosure will cripple international efforts to rein in the proliferation efforts of other governments. The revelations could have an impact beyond their "demonstration effect." News that Seoul took steps toward developing an indigenous nuclear-weapons capability -- whether intended or not -- gives other nations a rationale for pursuing their own weapons programs. Nuclear dominoes may start to fall. North Korea is likely to argue that it must match any South Korean capability. This also underscores the significance of a thorough and public IAEA investigation. Tokyo has expressed faith in Seoul's statements about the country's long-term intentions. Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda called the experiments regrettable but added that "We don't think it was a government policy to develop nuclear arms." Nevertheless, the revelations will encourage nuclear advocates in Japan -- and elsewhere -- to pursue a similar course. If there is a bright spot in the surprising news, it is that Seoul confessed. It was motivated to act because the experiments would have become known under the terms of the Additional Protocol of the NPT, which it signed in February and which gives IAEA inspectors the right to conduct more intrusive inspections than those permitted by the NPT itself. In other words, the Additional Protocol appears to have worked as intended, and made it harder to hide clandestine nuclear programs. That is encouraging, but the international community must now push to make the Additional Protocol required rather than optional. And while Seoul should be applauded for coming forward, it should also be shamed for insufficient control over its nuclear program. Rogue nuclear experiments are nothing to laugh at. The Japan Times: Sept. 7, 2004 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 9 Scotsman.com: Nuclear Weapons: Blair's 'Very Clear' Message to North Korea [http://www.scotsman.com/] Tue 7 Sep 2004 By John Deane, Chief Political Correspondent, PA News Britain wants to send “a very clear message” to North Korea that it must reveal the truth about its nuclear weapons programme, Prime Minister Tony Blair said today. Later this week, Foreign Office minister Bill Rammell will become the first British minister to visit the secretive communist state for talks on a range of issues including nuclear weapons. Mr Blair told his Downing Street press conference: “I think it is important to send a very clear message to North Korea about the priority we attach to North Korea getting into a proper dialogue, which means that we deal with the nuclear arms issue in relation to North Korea. “We do this without any doubts or illusions about the nature of the regime in North Korea, how it treats its own people, and the programmes that we think they are engaged in. “But I think it is important to reinforce that message and that is why a junior minister is going there. “Do I think it will work? I don’t know. You will have to ask me that when he comes back.” During his mission, Mr Rammell will also raise the issue of human rights abuses in talks with North Korean ministers. [ border=] ***************************************************************** 10 news24: Nuclear 'black market' probed [http://www.news24.com/ Johannesburg - Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) are in South Africa helping local authorities with an investigation into an international nuclear component trafficking network, said a spokesperson on Monday. This follows the arrest and court appearance last week of Vanderbijlpark engineering firm director Johan Meyer on charges under the Non-Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction Act and the Nuclear Energy Act. IAEA public information person Peter Rickwood, speaking from Vienna, would not directly link the inspectors' visit to Meyer's arrest. "This is part of the broader investigation into the illicit trafficking network - the nuclear supply network." He said the investigation was the result of a probe into the importing through third parties of uranium enrichment equipment. Don't want to tip off suspects Rickwood said the inspectors were in South Africa to "offer technical expertise" as they had deep knowledge about nuclear technology, but the media would "not have access" to them. "We can't say too much because we don't want to tip off suspects." An employee at Meyer's company said: "I am not allowed to comment, I am not allowed to speak to the media," and his lawyer, Heinrich Badenhorst, said he did not have a list of items seized when his client was arrested. Beeld newspaper said an uranium enrichment plant was transported from a factory in Vanderbijlpark in 11 trucks to Pelindaba at the weekend. They were accompanied by an IAEA inspector. Pelindaba is the base of Necsa, a company which promotes research and development in the field of nuclear energy and radiation sciences. A Necsa spokesperson said she had been instructed to refer all queries to the department of foreign affairs. Last week, the department issued a statement on Meyer's arrest on behalf of the SA Council for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Two other people arrested Abdul Minty, chairperson the council, said he would not answer any further questions until "the next few days". Information was sketchy on two other people with South African connections reportedly arrested by international authorities. Asher Karni, formerly employed by a Cape Town engineering company, was arrested in Denver in the United States in January and released on $100 000 (about R660 000) bail into the custody of a rabbi. A South Africa-based man called Gerhard Wisser was reportedly taken in for questioning in Germany. Edited by Elmarie Jack ***************************************************************** 11 news24: Uranium plant 'highly unlikely' [http://www.news24.com Elise Tempelhoff Johannesburg - It is possible for an individual to build a gas centrifuge for the enrichment of uranium, but the nuclear technology needed is so expensive and complex that it is improbable. If Johan Andries Muller Meyer, 53, a mechanical engineer, had got it right, it would have been the first time in history as until now this type of installation has been built only by major international institutions, said a scientist on Monday. In addition to this, Meyer would have needed millions of rands to build it. In South Africa, Melinda was the home of the country's nuclear weapons programme during the apartheid era, said the scientist. He was referring to an operation at the weekend, which led to the confiscation of Meyer's suspected uranium enrichment installation in Vanderbijlpark. Eleven lorries were loaded with equipment to be taken to Melinda. Some are making billions An International Atomic Energy Agency spokesperson said from Vienna, Austria, on Monday, that he was aware of the massive seizure. He confirmed that inspectors from the IAEA were in South African investigating "links in the network" that spans 20 countries. He said the investigation was an attempt to curb the black market in nuclear weapons. He said there were people who were part of this network who were making billions. Abdul Minty, chairperson for South Africa's council against weapons of mass destruction, said on Monday the case against Meyer was sub judice, but that the department of foreign affairs would release more information soon. Meyer was arrested on Thursday at his Vanderbijlpark firm after allegedly transgressing laws on nuclear power and the manufacture of weapons of mass destruction. He is expected to apply for bail on Tuesday. Edited by Iaine Harper [http://www.news24.com/ ***************************************************************** 12 JoongAng Daily: Nuclear arms and romantic daydreams September 8, 2004 KST 14:54 (GMT+9) In June 1975, President Park Chung Hee said in an interview with the Washington Post that South Korea would do everything necessary to defend itself if the United States withdrew its nuclear umbrella. The Blue House had already invited a Korean-American nuclear scientist to come back here, and Seoul's move elevated tensions with Washington over Mr. Park's determination to become a nuclear power. Then in June 1977, 42-year-old Benjamin W. Lee was killed in an automobile accident in Illinois. Widely considered as one of the most prominent theoretical physicists of his time, Dr. Lee went to the United States to study physics and was offered a professorship at the University of Pennsylvania at age 28. When the news of his death was learned, rumors that Washington's intelligence agencies were trying to stop Korea's nuclear development spread in Korea. If only Dr. Lee had survived the accident, he could have changed the fate of the Korean Peninsula, many thought. The wishful thinking exploded in 1993 when the writer Kim Jin-myung revived Dr. Lee in his book, "Mugunghwa Flowers Have Blossomed." Lee Yong-hu, Dr. Lee's character in the novel, provides the basis for a joint nuclear project of the two Koreas. The nuclear weapons developed by Korea proves to be powerful enough to deter the collaborative invasion of the United States and Japan. Mr. Kim combined a provocative theme of a U.S. and Japanese attack on Korea with the sentimental idea of joint nuclear weapons development by the two Koreas. The sentiment is still around, transformed into the so-called "nuclear romanticism" that the North's nuclear weapons are ultimately ours as well. Today, all nuclear research and activities should be reported to and scrutinized by the International Atomic Energy Agency. If we cheated, our sovereign credit rating would nosedive and the country would suffer. We have to keep in mind that even Libya, an oil producer, gave up nuclear development. We might celebrate the production of 0.2 grams of enriched uranium as a technological advance, but the problem is that the international community suspects our motives. Just as a romantic dream is never a reality, "nuclear romanticism" does not help. The writer is a political news deputy editor of the JoongAng Ilbo. by Ahn Sung-kyoo askme@joongang.co.kr> ***************************************************************** 13 iafrica.com: sa news Atomic energy inspectors in SA [http://iafrica.com/] JOHANNESBURG Jenni Evans Posted Tue, 07 Sep 2004 Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) are in South Africa helping local authorities with an investigation into an international nuclear component trafficking network, a spokesperson from the IAEA said on Monday. "We have inspectors in South Africa working closely with South African authorities in providing assistance in these investigations," IAEA public information person Peter Rickwood told Sapa from Vienna. This follows the arrest and court appearance last week of Vanderbijlpark engineering firm director Johan Meyer on Non-Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction Act and the Nuclear Energy Act charges. Rickwood would not directly link the inspectors' visit to Meyer's arrest but said: "This is part of the broader investigation into the illicit trafficking network — the nuclear supply network." He said the investigation was the result of a probe into the importing through third parties of uranium enrichment equipment. Rickwood said the inspectors were in South Africa to "offer technical expertise" as they had deep knowledge about nuclear technology but the media would "not have access" to them. "We can't say too much because we don't want to tip off suspects." An employee at Meyer's company told Sapa: "I am not allowed to comment, I am not allowed to speak to the media," and his lawyer Heinrich Badenhorst said he did not have a list of items seized when his client was arrested. Beeld newspaper said an uranium enrichment plant was transported from a factory in Vanderbijlpark in 11 trucks to Pelindaba at the weekend. They were accompanied by an IAEA inspector. Pelindaba is the base of Necsa, a company which promotes research and development in the field of nuclear energy and radiation sciences. A Necsa spokesperson said she had been instructed to refer all queries to the Department of Foreign Affairs, which last week issued a statement on Meyer's arrest on behalf of the SA Council for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Abdul Minty, chairperson of the council, told Sapa that he would not answer any further questions until "the next few days". Information was sketchy on two other people with South African connections reportedly apprehended by international authorities. Asher Karni, formerly employed by a Cape Town engineering company, was arrested in Denver in the US in January and released on $100 000 bail into the custody of a rabbi, while a South Africa-based man called Gerhard Wisser was reportedly taken in for questioning in Germany. On Friday the US embassy released a statement congratulating the South African authorities on their investigation as part of a crackdown on the "AQ Khan network". Abdul Qadeer Khan was credited with providing the Pakistan government with the knowledge needed to produce it first nuclear bomb, which it tested in 1998. Khan allegedly initially based his research on information he took from a Dutch uranium enrichment facility in the 1970s. He was forced out of his position in 1991 by Pakistan's General Pervez Musharraf reportedly amid concerns over finances. According to a report on www.globalsecurity.org, he has subsequently admitted to selling nuclear technology to other governments. According to the report, his wife Henny is of Dutch South African origin. Sapa [http://iafrica.com ***************************************************************** 14 Daily Times: New take on AQ Khan nuclear ‘whodunit’ Contact Us | Wednesday, September 08, 2004 By Khalid Hasan WASHINGTON: While the Abdul Qadeer Khan network had been known to US and British intelligence, it was only after the network began to offload unwanted centrifuges on Iran that Dr Khan and his circle became a prime target for Western intelligence, according to a British physicist. Dr Normal Dombey, professor of theoretical physics at the Sussex University, argues in the current issue of the London Review of Books that when Benazir Bhutto became Prime Minister of Pakistan, it was the US and not her own military who told her about Pakistani nuclear progress. “It is clear that the Pakistani security apparatus knew and approved of (Dr AQ) Khan’s doings. The former US ambassador to Pakistan, Robert Oakley, was reported in the New York Times as having said that General Mirza Aslam Beg, the Pakistani army chief from 1988 to 1991, had told him of Pakistan’s nuclear ties with Iran, in return for which Iran would provide Pakistan with oil and military aid,” he explains. He also quotes Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy who wrote that “since its inception, Pakistan’s nuclear programme has been squarely under army supervision. A multi-tiered security system was headed by a lieutenant general … with all nuclear installations kept under the tightest possible surveillance … In such an extreme security environment it would be amazing to miss the travel abroad of senior scientists … and the transfer of classified technical documents and components.” Prof Dombey maintains that the US and UK governments “support Pakistan’s claim that only a small group of men around Khan were responsible for exporting centrifuge equipment and blueprints.” He adds that after 9/11, it became essential for the US and Britain to close down the Khan network while keeping Gen Pervez Musharraf friendly and ensuring that he stayed in power. Libya provided the means to do that. The nuclear weapon design acquired from China was reportedly sent from Pakistan to Libya in late 2001 or early 2002. “Surprisingly, the IAEA reports that Libya ‘did not take any steps to act on the information, nor even to assess its credibility or practical utility.’ Hardly the behaviour of a country engaged in a clandestine programme to produce nuclear weapons,” he writes. Prof Dombey says the centrifuge parts began to arrive in 2002 and 2003. In October 2003, the German-owned vessel BBC China was seized in Italy carrying centrifuge equipment bound for Libya. It is not clear whether the consignment contained P-1 or P-2 components, but it doesn’t matter. There were no rotors or advanced electrical components such as magnetic bearings. SCOPE, the Malaysian company which had shipped the parts, manufactured only 14 types of component, all of them aluminium. A domestic washing machine needs more components than that, he adds. According to the British scientist, “The official story is that Khan and a small circle of associates started exporting old centrifuges without the government’s knowing (until autumn 2001) and then, motivated by greed, set up overseas manufacturing facilities”. The scientist says, “The more probable explanation is that after 9/11, the US forced Musharraf to act against Khan, and Gaddafi was persuaded to cooperate with the promise of an end to sanctions”. Prof Dombey is of the view that a political solution is available both for North Korea and for Iran, but the current US position is both “alarmist and counterproductive.” There is no nuclear threat at present or in the near future from Iran, he argues. There may be one in a year or two from North Korea if the next US administration does not negotiate seriously to return to the situation that prevailed four years ago under the Agreed Framework. “The really serious nuclear threat to international security is now from Pakistan. The unmasking of Khan and a few associates represents the tip of the iceberg,” he concludes. Home Daily Times - All Rights Reserved [http://www.wcis.com.pk] ***************************************************************** 15 Expatica: The Dutch role in shady nuclear deals Netherlands, Pakistan has pardoned atomic guru Dr Abdul Khan for trading nuclear secrets, but Khan's Dutch business partner is under investigation in the Netherlands. What exactly was the Dutch connection? Aaron Gray-Block reports. Suspicions of dodgy backroom deals have prompted the judiciary to investigate a Dutch national and his alleged role in supplying nuclear technology to Libya. International intelligence services have accused Henk Slebos — the Dutch academic friend and business partner of Pakistan atomic scientist Dr Abdul Khan — of having a dubious relationship to the North African state of Libya. Once synonymous with terrorism and the Lockerbie bombing, Libya is fast becoming a new found friend of the west. Importantly though, the German and Italian seizure of a ship full of nuclear components headed for Libya in October 2003 helped prompt it to reveal — and renounce — its nuclear weapons programme in December. It is curious though that Libya had already started talks with the US and Britain about ending its weapons of mass destruction programme, BBC reported. Did it operate in good faith and tip the Americans and the British off, or was it acting in bad faith? Dutchman linked to N-bomb father faces court Back in the Netherlands, however, Justice Ministry sources confirmed on 17 February that an investigation was now underway into a possible Dutch role in Libya's nuclear programme. It is not yet certain what crime Slebos is alleged to have committed. The Haarlem Public Prosecution Office (OM) has refused to confirm the name of the suspect, but a spokesman said an investigation is being conducted into an alleged breach by a Dutch company of the import and export law. The allegations relate to "dual use" goods that besides peaceful purposes, can also be applied to military use. The tax office's investigation service, FIOD-ECD, drew up a report about the matter last week, newspaper NRC Handelsblad reported. It is widely believed that Slebos is the suspect in the investigation. But then allegations against him are not new. His involvement in dubious trading dates back to at least 1985. Moreover, his name was mentioned again at the start of this month in Pakistan, where government officials revealed that Khan — known as the "father" of Pakistan's bomb — had confessed to selling nuclear secrets to North Korea, Iran and Libya via the black market. Abdul Qadeer Khan Surprisingly, however, Khan was pardoned by Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf on condition he would co-operate with the ongoing inquiry. The Pakistan inquiry and other investigations will examine the roles of several intermediaries who allegedly helped supply nuclear technology — including Dutch suspect Slebos — and who were mentioned in reports about Khan's confessions. The US media also reported last week that American intelligence services had evidence allegedly implicating Slebos in the black market trade. The Associated Press reported that the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and US agencies have said that Khan’s network became a comprehensive shopping venue for countries wanting atomic bombs. IAEA chief Mohammed El Baradei has also recently said that the danger of a nuclear war has never been so serious as it is now. In addition, the Dutch secret service AIVD has confirmed it is investigating how Dutch technology from the Urenco consortium — based in the eastern Dutch city of Almelo — was passed onto Libya, Iran and North Korea in the 1970s. The AIVD is working in co-operation with the IAEA. Khan worked with a Dutch company called Physics Dynamic Research Laboratory (FDO) from 1972-75. The company conducted research for Urenco, which was set up by the British, Dutch and German governments to provide equipment to enrich uranium. India detonated its first nuclear device in 1974 and it is widely assumed that part of the Pakistan project to develop its own bomb is based on the academic knowledge Khan gleaned in the Netherlands. Khan obtained blueprints for Urenco centrifuges used to extract uranium 235 — which is needed for a nuclear explosion — from uranium hexafluoride gas. This means that uranium can be enriched for use in a nuclear power station, but also for the higher levels needed for a nuclear bomb. The nuclear scientist left the Netherlands in the mid-1970s and set up near the Pakistan capital Islamabad the AQ Khan Research Laboratories. It is here where he started making his country's bomb. Convicted in absentia in the Netherlands for stealing the designs, Khan's conviction was overturned because he was not properly served with court papers. Dutch Foreign Minister Ben Bot and Economic Affairs Minister Laurens Jan Brinkhorst officially admitted to the Lower House of Parliament, the Tweede Kamer, last month that besides Pakistan, the centrifuge technology was possibly also passed onto Iran and North Korea. It is not yet known if the Pakistan government was aware of Khan's black market dealings, but the US has since proposed that uranium enrichment technology should be restricted to those countries which already have the capacity. It hopes this will prevent secret uranium enrichment. And on the eve of the US invasion to oust Saddam Hussein last year, Frits Veerman, the Dutch technician who worked with Khan and unintentionally helped him obtain nuclear secrets, claimed that the Pakistan academic had also sold centrifuge blueprints to Iraq. Khan is revered as a hero in Pakistan and is quoted as saying that he was on a holy mission. Prior to his confessions, he also told De Telegraaf newspaper in 2001 that his work was only intended to put Pakistan on the nuclear world map. He expressed pride in his work and expressed his thanks for the Netherlands. But for Veerman, the "brilliant academic" and his illegal activities have brought the world to the edge of a nuclear disaster. "As far as I am concerned, he deserves the strongest penalty — life imprisonment." Khan was not alone though and US officials claim that American and European investigators were targeting several men believed to have been involved in shady nuclear trading two decades ago. They still, however, allegedly became enmeshed in the black market network. Besides Slebos — who operates Slebos Research, a company that sponsored a conference organised by Pakistan’s Khan Research Laboratories last year — US intelligence services now claim that three Germans also helped Khan trade in nuclear secrets. But the suspicions about Slebos — who studied in the city of Delft, near The Hague — are well known to Dutch authorities and he was sentenced in 1985 to 12 months jail for exporting an oscilloscope to Pakistan. Such devices draw graphs of an electrical signal. Trouble was stirred again in 1998 because five intercepted shipments from Slebos Research and another company contained goods that could have been used in the Pakistan nuclear industry. Allegations of improper action have since returned and US officials claim that the evidence indicates Slebos was involved in the Khan network that supplied nuclear weapons equipment to Libya in the 1990s. Libya is alleged to have been supplied with nuclear weapon designs, blueprints and equipment. Slebos is now aged in his early 60s and lives in a modern villa in the North Holland town of Sint Pancras. He has angrily refused interviews, while his wife adamantly confirmed her husband is refusing to answer reporters' questions. But with some experts raising alarm that people suspected of smuggling back in the 1980s have played a role in Khan's trade, a refusal by Slebos to respond to allegations might only be a temporary grace. He might soon be forced, on the record, to answer the accusations in court. 20 February 2004 Editor's note: It was later confirmed that the court case against Slebos has been transferred to the Alkmaar Court, which ruled on 27 May that a judge will hear testimony from 12 witnesses in the coming few weeks. Slebos is facing charges relating to the illegal export of chemicals. Prosecutors claim the 20kg of chemicals — allegedly shipped to Pakistan from 1999 to 2002 — could be used in several ways, including in the making of mustard gas or ball bearings. Another man and two companies are also being prosecuted. But it is not clear if this case has any connection with Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb. Subject: Dutch news © copyright 2004 Expatica Communications BV ***************************************************************** 16 NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; In the Matter of System FR Doc 04-20199 [Federal Register: September 7, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 172)] [Notices] [Page 54160-54161] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07se04-76] Energy Resources, Inc. (Early Site Permit for Grand Gulf ESP Site); Notice of Hearing (Application for Early Site Permit) August 31, 2004. Before Administrative Judges: G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chairman; Dr. Paul B. Abramson; Dr. Anthony J. Baratta. This proceeding concerns the October 16, 2003 application of System Energy Resources, Inc., (SERI) for a 10 CFR part 52 early site permit (ESP). The ESP application seeks approval of the site of the existing Grand Gulf nuclear power station in Claiborne County, Mississippi, for the possible construction of one or more new nuclear reactors. In response to a January 7, 2004 notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene regarding the SERI ESP application (69 FR 2636 (Jan. 16, 2004)), on February 12, 2004, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (Claiborne County, Mississippi Branch), Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Public Citizen, and the Mississippi Chapter of the Sierra Club (collectively Grand Gulf Petitioners) filed a request for hearing and petition to intervene contesting the SERI ESP application, which they supplemented on February 17, 2004. Subsequently, the petitions were referred by the Commission to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel to conduct any subsequent adjudication. (See CLI-04-08, 59 NRC 113, 118-19 (2004).) On March 22, 2004, a three-member Atomic Safety and Licensing Board was established to adjudicate this ESP proceeding. (See 69 FR 15,911 (Mar. 26, 2004).) On June 21-22, 2004, the Board conducted a two-day initial prehearing conference at the NRC's Rockville, Maryland headquarters facility during which it heard oral presentations regarding the standing of the ESP petitioners and the admissibility of their seven proffered contentions. Thereafter, [[Page 54161]] in an August 6, 2004 issuance the Board noted that although the petitioners had established the requisite standing to intervene in this proceeding, they had failed to submit at least one admissible contention concerning the SERI ESP application so that none of them can be admitted as a party to this proceeding. (System Energy Resources, Inc. (Early Site Permit for Grand Gulf ESP Site), LBP-04-19, 60 NRC-- (Aug. 6, 2004).) Although this proceeding is now uncontested, as was indicated in the January 2004 notice regarding the SERI ESP application, 69 Fed. Reg. at 2636, and in accordance with the agency's regulations in 10 CFR part 52, the Licensing Board is to determine if (1) The application and the record of the proceeding contain sufficient information and the review of the application by the NRC staff has been adequate to support a negative finding on the issue of whether issuance of an ESP will be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public (Safety Issue 1); (2) an affirmative finding can be made on the issue of whether, taking into consideration the site criteria contained in 10 CFR part 100, a reactor or reactors having characteristics that fall within the parameters for the site, can be constructed and operated without undue risk to the public health and safety (Safety Issue 2); and (3) the review conducted by the Commission pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) has been adequate. Additionally, in accord with the January 2004 notice, the Board is to (1) Determine whether the requirements of NEPA sections 102(2)(A), (C), and (E) and 10 CFR part 51, subpart A, have been complied with in the proceeding; (2) independently consider the final balance among conflicting factors contained in the record of proceeding with a view to determining the appropriate action to be taken; and (3) determine, after considering reasonable alternatives, whether a license should be issued, denied, or appropriately conditioned to protect environmental values. This proceeding will be conducted in accordance with the procedures in 10 CFR part 2, Subparts C and L (10 CFR 2.300-.390, 2.1200-.1213). During the course of the proceeding, the Board may conduct an oral argument, as provided in 10 CFR 2.331, may hold additional prehearing conferences pursuant to 10 CFR 2.329, and may conduct evidentiary hearings in accordance with 10 CFR 2.327-.328, 2.1207. The public is invited to attend any oral argument, prehearing conference, or evidentiary hearing. Notices of those sessions will be published in the Federal Register and/or made available to the public at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and through the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov] . Additionally, as provided in 10 CFR 2.315(a), any person not a party to the proceeding may submit a written limited appearance statement. Limited appearance statements, which are placed in the docket for the hearing, provide members of the public with an opportunity to make the Board and/or the participants aware of their concerns about matters at issue in the proceeding. A written limited appearance statement can be submitted at any time and should be sent to the Office of the Secretary using one of the methods prescribed below: Mail to: Office of the Secretary, Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Fax to: (301) 415-1101 (verification (301) 415-1966). E-mail to: hearingdocket@nrc.gov [hearingdocket@nrc.gov] . In addition, a copy of the limited appearance statement should be sent to the Licensing Board Chairman using the same method at the address below: Mail to: Administrative Judge G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, Mail Stop T-3F23, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Fax to: (301) 415-5599 (verification (301) 415-7550). e-mail to: gpb@nrc.gov [gpb@nrc.gov] . At a later date, the Board may entertain oral limited appearance statements at a location or locations in the vicinity of the proposed Grand Gulf ESP site. Notice of any oral limited appearance sessions will be published in the Federal Register and/or made available to the public at the NRC PDR and on the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov] . Documents relating to this proceeding are available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR or electronically from the publicly available records component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] (the Public Electronic Reading Room). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800- 397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . It is so Ordered. Dated: August 31, 2004, in Rockville, Maryland. For the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.* G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Administrative Judge. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- * Copies of this notice of hearing were sent this date by Internet e-mail transmission to counsel for (1) Applicant SERI; (2) the Grand Gulf Petitioners; and (3) the NRC staff. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- [FR Doc. 04-20199 Filed 9-3-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 17 Guardian Unlimited: There is an alternative Comment Politicians are once more revving up the debate that only nuclear power can save the planet George Monbiot Tuesday September 7, 2004 [http://www.guardian.co.uk] For 50 years, nuclear power has been a solution in search of a problem. Now - oh, happy days! - two of them have arrived at once. Suddenly, climate change exists: George Bush says so. After years of ridicule, the greens' jeremiads about declining oil production are now spilling from other people's mouths. Politicians and the press have at last picked up our arguments, and are using them as a stick with which to beat us. If we care about climate change, if we care about future energy supplies, then surely we should support the revival of nuclear power? It is a question we have to answer. A few months ago, nuclear power was finished. The public hated it, the corporations wouldn't pay for it, the government wouldn't risk it. Its energy white paper established that there should be no new nuclear electricity without a full public consultation. In May this began to change. James Lovelock, the environmentalist famous for his "Gaia hypothesis", made this plea in the Independent: "I am a green and I entreat my friends in the movement to drop their wrong-headed objection to nuclear energy." "Green guru goes nuclear!" the headlines said. They weren't quite right. Lovelock has always been an enthusiast. It is, in both senses, a generational thing. Fifty years ago, Britain was promised that nuclear power would generate "electricity too cheap to meter". That dream lodged in the minds of his generation: almost all the technology's big fans are over 60. In July, Tony Blair was asked by the parliamentary liaison committee to answer Lovelock's points. "I have fought long and hard," he told the MPs, "both within my party and outside, to make sure that the nuclear option is not closed off... you cannot remove it from the agenda if you are serious about the issue of climate change." Two weeks ago, Blair's former energy minister, Brian Wilson, bravely abandoning the convention that articles in the Observer should be written in English, assured us that "retrievability has been established as being deliverable. In any case, waste is overwhelmingly a legacy issue. The waste produced by a new generation of nuclear stations would be incremental only at the margins." I haven't the faintest idea what this means, but there might be a clue in the title: "Face the facts. The future must be nuclear." Last month, the directors of the Centre for Alternative Technology - which is supposed to be developing alternatives to nuclear power - argued that "the worst possible nuclear disasters are not as bad as the worst possible climate change disasters", and suggested "a modest revival of nuclear energy in sites where there are already nuclear installations... to sell the idea to the sceptics". Their premise is surely correct. Let us use the cruel moral calculus with which we became familiar during the arguments over the Iraq war. The daily discharges from a plant like Sellafield probably kill several dozen people a year. A meltdown could slaughter thousands, possibly tens of thousands. Climate change has already killed hundreds of thousands, will kill millions, and, if we don't do something pretty dramatic pretty soon, could kill billions. Nuclear power isn't carbon-free. Mining uranium, and building and decommissioning power stations all use oil, and concrete releases carbon dioxide as it sets. But the total emissions, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, are tiny by comparison with the carbon dioxide produced by burning fossil fuels. It certainly looks more expensive, when the costs of decommissioning and waste disposal are taken into account. But what about the full costs of burning coal and gas? These are, and should be, incalculable: how do you put a price on global starvation? And it may no longer be true to say that there is no safe means of disposing of nuclear waste. I have just read a technical report produced by the Finnish nuclear authority Posiva which, to my untrained eye, looks pretty convincing. The spent fuel is set in cast iron, which is then encased in copper and dropped down a borehole. The borehole is filled with saturated bentonite, a kind of clay. Posiva's metallurgists suggest that under these conditions the copper barrier would be good for at least a million years. Of course, what can be done is not the same as what will be done. There's a danger that Posiva's good example is used as a Potemkin village by the rest of the nuclear industry: a showcase project which creates the impression that the problem has been sorted out. We certainly can't expect Britain's nuclear generators to behave as responsibly as Finland's. On Friday, for example, the European commission took the British government to court over Sellafield's refusal to let European inspectors examine one of its dumps. (Didn't we go to war over something like this?). Some 1.3 tonnes of plutonium has been sitting around in ponds there for about 30 years. Last Tuesday, the Guardian revealed that British Nuclear Fuels has secretly buried 10,000 cubic metres of nuclear waste from other countries. This sort of thing goes on all the time. The UK Atomic Energy Authority used to chuck its waste into two open holes in the cliffs beside its power station at Dounreay. One of the shafts exploded in 1977, scattering plutonium over the beaches, but the authority didn't bother to tell anyone for 18 years. The Ministry of Defence has dumped 17,000 tonnes of nuclear waste on the seabed off the coast of Alderney. This, rather than Posiva's expensive method, is the kind of disposal we can expect from most of the world's nuclear generators. So it's probably fair to say that the nuclear industry will kill tens of thousands. If, as seems ever more likely, terrorists get hold of some of this stuff, the deaths could run into millions. So the moral calculus shifts a little, but still comes down on the side of nuclear power, if that is the only alternative to burning fossil fuel. But it's not. When Lovelock claimed that "only one immediately available source does not cause global warming and that is nuclear energy", he was wrong on two counts. It is not the only one, and it is not immediately available. A new generation of nuclear power stations can be built only with government money: the private sector won't carry the risk. It would take at least 10 years, and it would cost tens or possibly hundreds of billions of pounds. The government will not spend this money twice: it will either invest massively in nuclear generation or invest massively in energy-saving and alternative power. The Rocky Mountain Institute has shown that you can save seven times as much carbon through electricity efficiencies as you can by investing in nuclear. And you kill no one. There'd be plenty of change too for a research programme to develop cheaper solar cells, with which, in time, almost every building in Britain could be roofed. So the dilemma established by James Lovelock and explored by Tony Blair and his incoherent ministers is a false one. There need be no choice between two kinds of mass death. We are still permitted to choose life. [http://www.monbiot.com] Special report The nuclear industry Graphics [http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2002/09 /17/nuclear_ship.pdf] Nuclear map of Britain US nuclear map Useful links [http://www.british-energy.com/] [http://www.dti.gov.uk/] [http://www.bnfl.co.uk/website.nsf/default.htm] [http://www.cnduk.org/] [http://www.greenpeace.org/homepage/] [http://www.hse.gov.uk/nsd/ilrwglos.htm] [http://www.ukaea.org.uk/] [http://www.nrpb.org.uk/] [http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/climate/press_for_change/dump_nuc lear/index.html] [http://www.uilondon.org/] [http://www.wnti.co.uk] [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 18 Guardian Unlimited: Investors try to block BE rescue Press Association Tuesday September 7, 2004 The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk] Disgruntled shareholders in troubled nuclear generator British Energy tried to block its life-saving restructuring package yesterday. Two of BE's institutional investors - Polygon Investments and Brandes Investment Partners - have demanded a special meeting to table changes to the firm's rules, which would prevent it delisting from the stock market without their permission. British Energy has insisted that the deal, which will leave shareholders with only 2.5% of the company, is the best it can achieve. It has warned that it may put itself into insolvency - leaving investors with nothing - if they fail to approve the rescue plan. But the two investor groups want a larger stake for shareholders. The government-backed restructuring was agreed last year, but has taken longer to complete because of the need for European commission state aid clearance. The plan involved banks and bondholders agreeing to write off Ł1.3bn in debt in return for control of the group. As part of the deal, British Energy pledged to improve its performance. Special report The nuclear industry Graphics The Mox ships' journey around the world (pdf) [http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2002/09 /17/nuclear_ship.pdf] Nuclear map of Britain US nuclear map Useful links British Energy [http://www.british-energy.com/] Department of Trade and Industry [http://www.dti.gov.uk/] British Nuclear Fuels Ltd [http://www.bnfl.co.uk/website.nsf/default.htm] Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament [http://www.cnduk.org/] Greenpeace [http://www.greenpeace.org/homepage/] HSE nuclear glossary [http://www.hse.gov.uk/nsd/ilrwglos.htm] UK atomic energy authority [http://www.ukaea.org.uk/] National Radiological Protection Board [http://www.nrpb.org.uk/] Friends of the Earth [http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/climate/press_for_change/dump_nuc lear/index.html] World Nuclear Association [http://www.uilondon.org/] World Nuclear Transport Institute [http://www.wnti.co.uk] [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 19 Daily Yomiuri: KEDO project work bar to be extended 1 yr Yomiuri Shimbun Japan, South Korea and the United States have reached a general agreement that the suspension of a project to build two light-water reactors in North Korea will be extended by another year from the end of November, government sources said Sunday. The project to construct the reactors by 2003 had been promoted by the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), an international consortium set up in 1995. KEDO board members consist of Japan, the European Union, South Korea and the United States. The decision to extend the suspension, which leaves room for the project's resumption in the future, is aimed at making Pyongyang completely abandon its nuclear development programs. KEDO's board is expected to formally adopt the agreement at a meeting scheduled to be held on Oct. 13 in New York, according to the sources. The light-water reactor project was launched in line with the 1994 Agreed Framework between the United States and North Korea, under which the United States pledged to provide the reactors in exchange for North Korea freezing its nuclear development programs. The actual project began in 1997. After North Korea admitted it had resumed nuclear development, KEDO decided at its November board meeting last year to suspend the project for one year from December. While construction work was then halted, about 100 workers dispatched from South Korea have continued to perform maintenance work and inspections at North Korea's nuclear facilities in Kumho. Following North Korea's declaration of the resumption of its nuclear development, the United States contended that the light-water project should be canceled, saying that the KEDO framework had collapsed. But Japan and South Korea called on the United States to just extend the suspension of the project, rather than cancel it, arguing that the KEDO framework was an effective means of forcing the energy-starved nation to agree to the complete abandonment of its nuclear ambitions. As of the end of June, South Korea had spent a total of 1.1 billion dollars on the construction of the light-water reactors. If the project were canceled, South Korean firms, including the original contractor, Korea Electric Power Corp., would be hard hit. Japan is second to South Korea in terms of disbursements on the project, having spent 390 million dollars on it. A government source said such a project, in which a sizable amount of taxpayers' money was involved, could not easily be canceled. The United States did not allocate a budget for KEDO operations for this fiscal year or the last. The fact that Japan and South Korea have covered about 90 percent of the construction costs was taken into account by Washington, leading it to accept the stand of its two Asian allies, the sources said. In six-way talks on North Korea's nuclear development programs, Japan, South Korea and the United States have pressed North Korea to abandon its nuclear programs in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner. But Pyongyang wants to obtain energy aid from overseas donors in return for merely freezing its nuclear programs. At the June meeting, six nations, including China and Russia, agreed to hold the next round of six-way talks in September. But since then the rift between the United States and North Korea has deepened, and a concrete schedule for the next round of talks has yet to be decided. Copyright 2004 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 20 Daily Yomiuri: KEPCO opens Mihama reactor to press Yomiuri Shimbun Kansai Electric Power Co. opened its No. 3 reactor at Mihama Nuclear Power Plant in Mihamacho, Fukui Prefecture, to the press Tuesday, allowing them to see the area where a steam pipe ruptured last month, killing five people and injuring six. Pieces of insulation that once covered the pipes lay scattered across the floor. Railings had been pulled down by workers to protect themselves from the hot water that sprayed from the pipe onto the floor as they attempted rescue their colleagues. On a table under the broken pipe, work gloves and tools lay in the same place they were left at the time of the accident. Flowers, sake and tobacco have been placed on a stand at the building as an offering to the souls of the five workers who lost their lives. Copyright 2004 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 21 Daily Yomiuri: Mihama reactor's B pipes breached rules Yomiuri Shimbun The walls of the second pipe system's B system pipes at the No. 3 reactor of Mihama Nuclear Power Plant in Mihamacho, Fukui Prefecture, have been found to be thinner than allowed under government standards, according to an inspection by a government nuclear safety agency. The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, which is under the wing of the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry, announced the results of its inspection Monday. The second system pipes consist of A and B system pipes, the former of which caused the fatal Aug. 9 steam blowout at the reactor in which five workers were killed and six injured. Both pipe systems have been found to be in breach of government thickness standards. The agency said there was a possibility that a similar accident could occur in the B system pipes, saying the thinnest walls were only 1.8-millimeters thick and the pipes were at high risk. Monday's announcement at an inspection committee meeting held the same day in Fukui revealed the poor safety management of the nuclear power plant's operator, Kansai Electric Power Co. KEPCO did not inspect the A or B system pipes during the 28 years or so in which they were in use. Fukui prefectural police investigated the two systems to compare the thickness of the walls and discovered erosion of the pipe walls in the B system in the lower reaches of a device that measures the flow of cooling water. At their thinnest, the pipe walls were only 1.8-millimeters thick--less than half the minimum 4.7 millimeters specified under government regulations. Copyright 2004 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 22 The Herald: British Energy holds to its plan Web Issue 2088 September 07 2004 BEN GRIFFITHS September 07 2004 British Energy, the troubled nuclear power generator, last night warned it was sticking to a rescue plan despite a last-ditch effort by minority shareholders to win a better deal. Last year, the company agreed a life-saving arrangement with its creditors and the government, including writing off Ł1.3bn in debt. However, the move is set to decimate the interests of around 235,000 shareholders in the former FTSE-100 group, many of whom bought into its 1996 privatisation. Dissident hedge fund manager Polygon Investments and US investor Brandes Investment Partners have demanded an extraordinary meeting of the company next month. Polygon has been drumming up support in an effort to scupper British Energy's plan and to grab more value for long-suffering shareholders. If the investors can get an EGM called for next month they could look to humiliate British Energy's board. Together Polygon and Brandes, along with another shareholder Invesco, account for around a fifth of the group's shares and are banking on support from disgruntled private investors. British Energy has warned that if it does not get the support of shareholders for the financial restructuring it will go into voluntary insolvency, meaning investors may get nothing. It said yesterday that it would continue its efforts to implement the deal, but may have to instigate insolvency proceedings if this plan failed. Shares in the company soared 10% to close 2.25p higher at 24.75p yesterday. In a statement to the London Stock Exchange, British Energy revealed that investment bank Morgan Stanley had acquired some stock, taking its holding to 3.04% of the group before selling again and falling below the minimum threshold for disclosing a stake to the London market. British Energy, which generates around a fifth of the UK's power, was pushed to the brink of administration by a slump in wholesale electricity prices. It is waiting for a key decision by the European Commission, now expected in September having been put back due to a government delay. Copyright © Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights ***************************************************************** 23 NRC: State of Utah: Discontinuance of Certain Commission Regulatory FR Doc 04-20190 [Federal Register: September 7, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 172)] [Notices] [Page 54162-54164] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07se04-79] Authority Within the State; Notice of Amendment to Agreement Between the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the State of Utah AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of amendment to the agreement between NRC and the state of Utah. SUMMARY: This notice is announcing that on August 10, 2004, Dr. Nils J. Diaz, Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and on August 16, 2004, Governor Olene S. Walker of the State of Utah signed an amendment to the Agreement between the NRC and the State of Utah as authorized by section 274b of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act). The amendment to the Agreement became effective on August 16, 2004. The amendment to the Agreement provides for the Commission to discontinue its regulatory authority and for Utah to assume regulatory authority over the possession and use of byproduct material as defined in section 11e.(2) of the Act. Under the amendment to the Agreement, a person in Utah possessing this material is exempt from certain Commission regulations. The exemptions have been [[Page 54163]] previously published in the Federal Register (FR) and are codified in the Commission's regulations at 10 CFR part 150. The amendment to the Agreement (Appendix A) is published as required by section 274e of the Act. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis M. Sollenberger, Office of State and Tribal Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Telephone (301) 415-2819 or e-mail DMS4@nrc.gov [ DMS4@nrc.gov] . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The draft amendment to the Agreement was published in the Federal Register (FR) for comment once a week for four consecutive weeks (see e.g., 69 FR 7026; February 12, 2004) as required by the Act. The public comment period ended on March 15, 2004. The Commission received one comment letter (ML040780577 and ML040780567) which was addressed by the NRC staff. The commenter raised questions on Utah's adoption of the NRC policy allowing alternate feed materials to be processed at uranium mills, on proceeding with the amendment to the Agreement while the Commission is considering the proposed alternative groundwater standards, and on several other issues dealing with specific NRC past actions and what approach Utah should take in the future in implementing the amendment to the Agreement. The NRC staff analyzed these comments and prepared responses to them (ML042240493). The NRC staff determined that the comments received do not affect the NRC staff's assessment which finds the Utah 11e.(2) byproduct material program adequate to protect public health, safety, and environment, and compatible with the NRC's program. Thus, Utah meets NRC's criteria for an Agreement for 11e.(2) byproduct material. The proposed Utah amendment to the Agreement is consistent with Commission policy and thus, meets the criteria for an 11e.(2) byproduct material amendment to the Agreement with the Commission. After considering the request for an amendment to the Agreement by the Governor of Utah, the supporting documentation submitted with the request for the amendment to the Agreement, and the interactions with the staff of the Utah Division of Radiation Control, Department of Environmental Quality, the NRC staff completed an assessment of the Utah 11e.(2) byproduct material program. A copy of the NRC staff assessment (ML041940185) was made available in the NRC's PDR and electronically on NRC's Web site. Based on the documents submitted by Utah, the NRC staff's analysis of comments, and the NRC staff's assessment, the Commission determined on August 4, 2004, that the proposed Utah 11e.(2) byproduct material program is adequate to protect public health, safety, and the environment, and that it is compatible with the NRC's program (ML042170320). Documents referred to in this notice and other publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after November 1, 1999, are also available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] . From this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of August, 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. Appendix A--Amendment to Agreement Between the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the State of Utah for Discontinuance of Certain Commission Regulatory Authority and Responsibility Within the State Pursuant to Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as Amended Whereas, the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) entered into an Agreement on March 29, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement of March 29, 1984) with the State of Utah under Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (hereafter referred to as the Act) which became effective on April 1, 1984, providing for discontinuance of the regulatory authority of the Commission within the State under Chapters 6, 7, and 8 and Section 161 of the Act with respect to byproduct materials as defined in Section 11e.(1) of the Act, source materials, and special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass; and, Whereas, the Commission entered into an amendment to the Agreement of March 29, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement of March 29, 1984, as amended) pursuant to the Act providing for discontinuance of regulatory authority of the Commission with respect to the land disposal of source, byproduct, and special nuclear material received from other persons which became effective on May 9, 1990; and, Whereas, the Governor of the State of Utah requested, and the Commission agreed, that the Commission reassert Commission authority for the evaluation of radiation safety information for sealed sources or devices containing byproduct, source or special nuclear materials and the registration of the sealed sources or devices for distribution, as provided for in regulations or orders of the Commission; and, Whereas, the Governor of the State of Utah is authorized under Utah Code Annotated 19-3-113 to enter into this amendment to the Agreement of March 29, 1984, as amended, between the Commission and the State of Utah; and, Whereas, the Governor of the State of Utah has requested this amendment in accordance with Section 274 of the Act by certifying on January 2, 2003 that the State of Utah (hereinafter referred to as the State) has a program for the control of radiological and non- radiological hazards adequate to protect the public health and safety and the environment with respect to byproduct material as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the Act and facilities that generate this material and that the State desires to assume regulatory responsibility for such material; and, Whereas, the Commission found on August 4, 2004, that the program of the State for the regulation of materials covered by this Amendment is in accordance with the requirements of the Act and in all other respects compatible with the Commission's program for the regulation of byproduct material as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the Act and is adequate to protect public health and safety; and, Whereas, the State and the Commission recognize the desirability and importance of cooperation between the Commission and the State in the formulation of standards for protection against hazards of radiation and in assuring that the State and the Commission programs for protection against hazards of radiation will be coordinated and compatible; and, Whereas, this Amendment to the Agreement of March 29, 1984, as amended, is entered into pursuant to the provisions of the Act. Now, Therefore, it is hereby agreed between the Commission and the Governor of the State, acting on behalf of the State, as follows: Section 1. Article I of the Agreement of March 29, 1984, as amended, is amended by adding a new paragraph B and renumbering paragraphs B through D as paragraphs C through E. Paragraph B will read as follows: ``B. Byproduct materials as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the Act;'' Section 2. Article II of the Agreement of March 29, 1984, as amended, is amended by deleting paragraph E and inserting a new paragraph E to implement the reassertion of Commission authority over sealed sources and devices to read: ``E. The evaluation of radiation safety information on sealed sources or devices containing byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials and the registration of the sealed sources or devices for distribution, as provided for in regulations or orders of the Commission.'' Section 3. Article II of the Agreement of March 29, 1984, as amended, is amended by numbering the current Article as ``A'' by [[Page 54164]] placing an A in front of the current Article language. The subsequent paragraphs A through E are renumbered as paragraphs 1 through 5. After the current amended language, the following new Paragraph B is added to read: ``B. Notwithstanding this Agreement, the Commission retains the following authorities pertaining to byproduct material as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the Act: 1. Prior to the termination of a State license for such byproduct material, or for any activity that resulted in the production of such material, the Commission shall have made a determination that all applicable standards and requirements pertaining to such material have been met; 2. The Commission reserves the authority to establish minimum standards governing reclamation, long-term surveillance or maintenance, and ownership of such byproduct material and of land used as a disposal site for such material. Such reserved authority includes: a. The authority to establish terms and conditions as the Commission determines necessary to assure that, prior to termination of any license for such byproduct material, or for any activity that results in the production of such material, the licensee shall comply with decontamination, decommissioning, and reclamation standards prescribed by the Commission; and with ownership requirements for such materials and its disposal site; b. The authority to require that prior to termination of any license for such byproduct material or for any activity that results in the production of such material, title to such byproduct material and its disposal site be transferred to the United States or the State of Utah at the option of the State (provided such option is exercised prior to termination of the license); c. The authority to permit use of the surface or subsurface estates, or both, of the land transferred to the United States or the State pursuant to 2.b. in this Section in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, as amended, provided that the Commission determines that such use would not endanger public health, safety, welfare, or the environment; d. The authority to require, in the case of a license for any activity that produces such byproduct material (which license was in effect on November 8, 1981), transfer of land and material pursuant to paragraph 2.b. in this Section taking into consideration the status of such material and land and interests therein, and the ability of the licensee to transfer title and custody thereof to the United States or the State; e. The authority to require the Secretary of the Department of Energy, other Federal agency, or State, whichever has custody of such byproduct material and its disposal site, to undertake such monitoring, maintenance, and emergency measures as are necessary to protect public health and safety, and other actions as the Commission deems necessary; and f. The authority to enter into arrangements as may be appropriate to assure Federal long-term surveillance or maintenance of such byproduct material and its disposal site on land held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe or land owned by an Indian Tribe and subject to a restriction against alienation imposed by the United States.'' Section 4. Article IX of the 1984 Agreement, as amended, is renumbered as Article X and a new Article IX is inserted to read: ``ARTICLE IX In the licensing and regulation of byproduct material as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the Act, or of any activity which results in the production of such byproduct material, the State shall comply with the provisions of Section 274o of the Act. If in such licensing and regulation, the State requires financial surety arrangements for reclamation or long-term surveillance and maintenance of such byproduct material: A. The total amount of funds the State collects for such purposes shall be transferred to the United States if custody of such byproduct material and its disposal site is transferred to the United States upon termination of the State license for such byproduct material or any activity that results in the production of such byproduct material. Such funds include, but are not limited to, sums collected for long-term surveillance or maintenance. Such funds do not, however, include monies held as surety where no default has occurred and the reclamation or other bonded activity has been performed; and B. Such surety or other financial requirements must be sufficient to ensure compliance with those standards established by the Commission pertaining to bonds, sureties, and financial arrangements to ensure adequate reclamation and long-term management of such byproduct material and its disposal site.'' This amendment shall become effective on August 15, 2004, and shall remain in effect unless and until such time as it is terminated pursuant to Article VIII of the Agreement of March 29, 1984, as amended. Done at Rockville, Maryland, in triplicate, this 10th day of August 2004. For the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. /RA/ Nils J. Diaz, Chairman. Done at Salt Lake City, Utah, in triplicate, this 16th day of August 2004. For the state of Utah. /RA/ Olene S. Walker, Governor. [FR Doc. 04-20190 Filed 9-3-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 24 TheStar.com: Plant more than hot air [http://www.thestar.com/] Tue. Sep. 7, 2004. | Updated at 06:38 AM Markham project takes electricity into the future Co-generation provides power when blackouts hit MELISSA LEONG STAFF REPORTER Bruce Ander gestures to a building behind him and says it's the power plant of the future. You point to the larger building on his left  that one? "No, that's the warehouse," he says. He's talking about the smaller, nondescript rectangular building behind Markham Hydro Power Stream's headquarters at Highway 407 and Warden Ave. It's Markham's district energy plant, which produces electricity and supplies heat and cooling through underground pipes to 1 million square feet of development in the area. "This is really the power plant of the future ... smaller power plants close to the community," says Ander, president of Markham District Energy Inc., the town firm managing the plant. "It's an example of distributed generation, as opposed to a large remote coal or nuclear plant, which is known as central generation." The plant services the nearby Motorola building and the IBM software laboratory. The town's expanding it, laying more pipes to reach a Tridel project under construction, a new YMCA and the Markham Civic Centre. The system will grow along with the Markham Centre development. "We build it, they will come," Ander, 49, says. "This is the first community I know of in Canada where we're trying to superimpose a community development on a system like this." This summer, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities gave the company a $1.5 million grant and a $4 million loan to expand. Last month, actor Alec Baldwin was in Toronto to laud district energy; Enwave District Energy Ltd. launched its deep lake water cooling project, which will cool downtown buildings. Hot and cold water is piped underground to heat and cool the buildings connected to the Markham system. These pipes are buried a metre and a half underground and connect to heat exchangers inside the buildings. "It saves (the businesses) up-front capital," Ander says. "This is a very strong economic development tool. "We think they want to locate here for a variety of reasons, but this is one of them." The natural-gas fired co-generation system is "not unlike a car engine, spark plugs, spark ignition." The generator produces 3.5 megawatts of power (enough to power 2,000 homes). As the system expands and a larger plant is built, the two combined will produce 27 megawatts. As a comparison, he says, "the town of Markham consumes 350 megawatts at any one time." The electricity is fed to the local system and Markham Hydro Power Stream pays for it. While the engine is running, heat is also being recovered, he says. "When a car engine is running in the winter, if you turn on the heating control, you're recovering heat from the engine." Heat recovered in the system is fed to the boilers and helps heat the buildings. "That's the environmental win. Because it's free heat, we're avoiding having buildings burn natural gas.... Higher efficiency leads to lower emissions." When Markham Centre is fully developed  with more than 25,000 residents and 17,000 employees working and living in 15 million square feet of development  the district system will reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the development by about 50 per cent and ease blackout problems. "We saw what happened ... when the ice storm came. Being dependent on the grid really left us vulnerable to all kinds of problems. If we could have had our own internal system, we'd have a backup plan." Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All ***************************************************************** 25 NRC: State of Utah: Final Determination on Proposed Alternative FR Doc 04-20191 [Federal Register: September 7, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 172)] [Notices] [Page 54164-54165] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07se04-80] Groundwater Standards for 11e.(2) Byproduct Material AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of Final Commission Determination under Section 274o of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; State of Utah Proposed Alternative Groundwater Standards. SUMMARY: This notice is announcing that on August 4, 2004, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) made the determination required by section 274o of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act) for Agreement State proposed alternative standards for 11e.(2) byproduct material. The Commission has determined that the State of Utah's proposed alternative groundwater standards will achieve a level of stabilization and containment of the sites concerned, and a level of protection for public health, safety, and the environment from radiological and non- radiological hazards associated with such sites, which is equivalent to, to the extent practicable, or more stringent than the level which would be achieved by standards and requirements adopted and enforced by the Commission for the same purpose and any final standards promulgated by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in accordance with section 275 of the Act. This notice completes the notice and public hearing process required in section 274o of the Act for proposed State alternative standards. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis M. Sollenberger, Office of State and Tribal Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Telephone (301) 415-2819 or e-mail DMS4@nrc.gov [ DMS4@nrc.gov] . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission approved a similar process to that specified at 10 CFR part 2, subpart H to fulfill both provisions for notice and for opportunity for public hearing required by section 274o of the Act. The Commission published a notice and opportunity for public hearing in the Federal Register on the State of Utah's proposed alternative groundwater standards for a 30-day comment period (68 FR 51516, August 27, 2003). On October 24, 2003, the Commission published a clarification of the notice and opportunity for public hearing in the August 27, 2003 notice, noticed the electronic availability of two [[Page 54165]] documents referenced in the earlier notice, and extended the comment period for an additional 30 days (68 FR 60885). The public comment period ended on November 24, 2003. The Commission received three comment letters on Utah's alternative groundwater standards proposal (ML032750048, ML032820353, and ML033420067) and one letter with supplements on the Commission's alternative standards determination process (ML032720672, ML032750048, and ML033140034). The NRC staff prepared a letter response dated June 21, 2004 (ML041770014) to the commenter on the Commission's alternative standards determination process. The NRC staff prepared an analysis of comments for the comments received on Utah's proposed alternative groundwater standards (ML042240488). One commenter did not object to Utah's alternative groundwater regulations; however, the commenter said the discharge permit discussions on implementation is the test of the standards. Another commenter stated that the Utah's proposed alternative groundwater standards were equivalent or more stringent than the NRC and EPA groundwater standards. The third commenter raised concerns with NRC's past implementation of its groundwater standards and wants Utah to implement a more rigorous groundwater protection program. No deficiencies in Utah's proposed alternative groundwater standards were identified by the commenters. The Commission considered the information provided in SECY-03-025 (ML032901045) which included the State of Utah comparison between Utah's proposed alternative groundwater standards and NRC's standards, and the NRC staff's initial determination that Utah's proposed alternative groundwater standards are equivalent to or more stringent than the NRC groundwater standards. The Commission considered the comments submitted in response to the August 27 and October 24, 2003 Federal Register notices and the NRC staff's analysis of the comments, and the NRC staff's recommendation that the Commission approve a final determination that Utah's alternative groundwater standards meet the requirements in section 274o of the Act. On August 4, 2004, the Commission made a determination that Utah's alternative groundwater standards are equivalent to or more stringent than the NRC's groundwater standards for 11e.(2) byproduct material (ML042170320). The documents referenced above and publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] . From this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of August, 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 04-20191 Filed 9-3-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 26 NRC: Entergy Operations, Inc., Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2; Notice FR Doc 04-20192 [Federal Register: September 7, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 172)] [Notices] [Page 54161-54162] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07se04-77] of Availability of the Draft Supplement 19 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement and Public Meeting for the License Renewal of Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2 Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has published a draft plant-specific supplement to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS), NUREG-1437, regarding the renewal of operating license NPF-6 for an additional 20 years of operation at Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2 (ANO-2). ANO-2 is located in Pope County, Arkansas, approximately 6 miles west-northwest of Russellville, Arkansas. Possible alternatives to the proposed action (license renewal) include no action and reasonable alternative energy sources. The draft Supplement to the GEIS is available for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 20852 or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] (the Public Electronic Reading Room). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the PDR reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301- 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . In addition, the Ross Pendergraft Library at Arkansas Tech University, 305 West Q Street, Russellville, Arkansas, 72801, has agreed to make the draft plant- specific supplement to the GEIS available for public inspection. Any interested party may submit comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS for consideration by the NRC [[Page 54162]] staff. To be certain of consideration, comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS and the proposed action must be received by November 24, 2004. Comments received after the due date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC staff is able to assure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. Written comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS should be sent to: Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Comments may be hand-delivered to the NRC at 11545 Rockville Pike, Room T-6D59, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Electronic comments may be submitted to the NRC by e- mail at ANOEIS@nrc.gov [ANOEIS@nrc.gov] . All comments received by the Commission, including those made by Federal, State, and local agencies, Native American Tribes, or other interested persons, will be made available electronically at the Commission's PDR in Rockville, Maryland, and from the PARS component of ADAMS. The NRC staff will hold a public meeting to present an overview of the draft plant-specific supplement to the GEIS and to accept public comments on the document. The public meeting will be held on October 21, 2004, at the Holiday Inn, 2407 N. Arkansas Avenue, Russellville, Arkansas. The meeting will commence at 7 p.m. and will continue until 10 p.m. It will be transcribed and will include: (1) A presentation of the contents of the draft plant-specific supplement to the GEIS, and (2) the opportunity for interested government agencies, organizations, and individuals to provide comments on the draft report. Additionally, the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour before the start of the meeting at the same location. No comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS will be accepted during the informal discussions. To be considered, comments must be provided either at the transcribed public meeting or in writing, as discussed below. Persons may pre-register to attend or present oral comments at the meeting by contacting Mr. Thomas Kenyon be telephone at 1-800-368-5642, extension 1120, or by e-mail at ANOEIS@nrc.gov [ANOEIS@nrc.gov] no later than October 15, 2004. Members of the public may also register within 15 minutes of the start of the session to provide oral comments. Individual oral comments may be limited by the time available, depending on the number of persons who register. If special equipment or accommodations are needed to attend or present information at the public meeting, the need should be brought to Mr. Kenyon's attention no later than October 15, 2004, to provide the NRC staff adequate notice to determine whether the request can be accommodated. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Kenyon, License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555- 0001. Mr. Kenyon may be contacted at the aforementioned telephone number or e-mail address. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day of August, 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Samson S. Lee, Acting Program Director, License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 04-20192 Filed 9-3-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 27 HeraldNet: Children of Chernobyl [http://www.heraldnet.com/] Published: Tuesday, September 7, 2004 Families in area host children in need of care for summer Story and photos by Dan Bates Herald Photographer In the firelight, Vladimir Sopat’s face reflects the kind of day it has been. The 9-year-old from Yurovichi, Belarus, has been running about on the sandy beach outside a little cabin on Puget Sound. He has played in the water on a small sailboat, climbed on logs and pranced along catwalks to and from the shore. Now it is evening, and the boy will light a sparkler in the bonfire and watch fireworks because it is the Fourth of July. While it is indeed a great day for an outing, what makes it even greater for Vladimir and several other young Belarussians in the group is that the sand and grass, the logs, and all the shoreline that they run and play on is not contaminated with radiation. On July 1, Vladimir and 75 other children from the most radiation-contaminated region on Earth arrived in Washington state to spend the summer living with local families. All the kids, age 8 to 16, are from Belarus, the country just north of Ukraine, which took about 70 percent of the fallout from the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear power plant explosion and remains seriously contaminated to this day. Related medical problems continue to devastate Belarussians, and children born in the years since the disaster are not excluded from risk. Nurse practitioner Carol Clark at the Everett Clinic and Scooter Perlwitz of Global Family Alliance in Carlsborg, a small town on the Olympic Peninsula, went to Belarus in January to test and identify children who would benefit from the medical attention and fresh air they could receive here in the United States. Clark is no novice in this area. During the famines of the ’80s, the Marysville woman worked the refugee camps in Cambodia, Somalia and drought-ridden Ethiopia. In the cities and villages of Belarus, Clark checked children for signs of disease. At one point she found herself in a snowy field examining a girl’s head and neck and studying her thyroid for enlargement. She found another girl named Tanya Cananchuk who was 16, “a little old for the program,” but, Clark said, Tanya’s vision was badly deteriorating. A diagnosis in Belarus indicated Stargardt’s disease. “I just knew I had to get her back here,” Clark said. When the group returned, they recruited host families who would be good matches for the children. Everett Clinic optometrist Chris Hudspeth volunteered to host Tanya Cananchuk, and spearhead efforts to help her. Families who agreed to be hosts put up $1,200 to $1,400 for each child’s travel costs. In some cases scholarships, donations and fund-raisers played a part in making it happen. Everett Clinic professionals, including 20 doctors and a dozen technicians, nurses and support staff, performed blood tests, complete physicals and, in many cases, advanced tests on more than 70 kids. They contributed more than $35,000 in donated medical services. Thyroid tests were completed on all the children and doctors made three new diagnoses of disease requiring thyroid medication. Everett Clinic ophthalmologist Dr. Robert Campbell examined Tanya Cananchuk and Providence General Medical Center provided a fluorescein angiogram, a dye study of the back of the eye. Tanya, it turned out, has Best disease, which cannot be cured, but is less devastating in the long run than Stargardt’s. Dental needs were huge. Nearly a dozen local dentists provided free services to the children. Most of the hosts found their own family dentists willing to volunteer the work, which was significant. Most of the kids had six or more cavities. Language barriers existed, but five translators stayed for the summer, helping with serious conversations about health and light conversations about family. A few of the young Belarussians had some English language skills. Communication occurred one way or the other, so bonds were created between the children and their host families. Tatsiana Puzyna, 11, of Vezhny, Belarus, swam for the first time in her life after her host family, Jim and Lori Jacobson of Marysville and their four daughters, taught her to swim at Moses Lake. That was just one of the summer adventures that bonded Tatsiana with the Jacobson girls and her host mother. On their final day together, young Belarussians and their hosts filled a large room at Sea-Tac Airport. It was the staging area for a long, hard two days of travel, and also a place to say goodbye. Many still struggled with a few words of English, or a few words of Russian. When words failed, however, facial expressions took over, and tearful eyes did the talking. In the middle of the room was Tatsiana Puzyna surrounded by four American sisters who were not quite ready to say goodbye. When an official announced that it was time for the hosts to leave, Tatsiana thanked her host mother, Lori Jacobson, with a difficult sentence in English that was proper and thoughtful. Then she hugged her “mom” for the last time, and the full, sweet sentiment of her summer in America shown on her face. [http://www.heraldnet.com/PhotoGallery/index.cfm?GalleryID=64] Dan Bates / The Herald Nine-year-old Vladimir Sopat of Yurovichi, Belarus, carefully blows on a sparkler during a Fourth of July celebration earlier this summer at a beachfront cabin on Puget Sound. Copyright © 2003 The Daily Herald Co., Everett, Wash. ***************************************************************** 28 Reuters: UPDATE 2-American Electric to sell Texas plant stake Tue Sep 7, 2004 10:39 AM ET NEW YORK, Sept 7 (Reuters) - American Electric Power Co. Inc. on Tuesday said it agreed to sell its 25.2 percent stake in the South Texas Project nuclear plant to two other co-owners who scuttled a previously announced deal by exercising their right of first refusal. AEP, the largest U.S. power producer, said it will sell the stake to Texas Genco Holdings Inc. and the City Public Service Board of San Antonio for about $332 million. Texas Genco will buy 13.2 percent of the 2,500 megawatt plant in Matagorda County, Texas, for about $174 million, bringing Genco's total stake to 44 percent. The City Public Service Board of San Antonio will buy 12 percent of the South Texas Project for about $158 million, bringing its stake to 40 percent. The City of Austin, which owns the remaining 16 percent of the plant, did not exercise its right of first refusal for the AEP stake. The deal, which AEP expects to close in late 2004 or early 2005, is subject to regulatory approval. Columbus, Ohio-based AEP agreed in March to sell the stake to Canadian uranium supplier Cameco Corp. for about $332.6 million. AEP said it will pay a $7 million breakup fee to Cameco when their purchase and sale agreement is terminated. In December 2002, the company announced plans to sell the generation assets owned by its Texas Central Co. unit in order to take advantage of a Texas law that provides for the recovery of the costs of building a plant as part of the transition to a competitive retail market. AEP shares rose 19 cents to $33.10 on the New York Stock Exchange. ***************************************************************** 29 NRC: License No. SNM-2509] Trojan FR Doc 04-20193 [Federal Register: September 7, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 172)] [Notices] [Page 54159-54160] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07se04-75] Portland General Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of Approval of Portland General Electric Company's Application for Consent for Indirect Transfer of Facility Licenses for the Trojan Nuclear Plant and Trojan Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation and Opportunity for Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or NRC) is considering the issuance of an order under 10 CFR 50.80 and 72.50 approving the indirect transfer of Portland General Electric's (PGE's) licenses NPF-1 [for the Trojan Nuclear Plant (TNP)] and SNM-2509 [for the Trojan Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI)] from Enron Corp. (Enron) to Oregon Electric Utility Company, LLC (OEUC). In a letter dated June 14, 2004, Portland General Electric Company (PGE) requested NRC consent to the acquisition of all the issued and outstanding common shares of PGE stock by OEUC. PGE owns 67.5 percent interest in the TNP and the Trojan ISFSI. According to the application, on November 18, 2003, PGE's corporate parent Enron and OEUC entered into a definitive agreement (the Transaction) under which OEUC will acquire all of the issued, and outstanding, common shares of PGE stock and become the sole [[Page 54160]] owner of PGE. OEUC is an Oregon limited liability company formed for the sole purpose of holding the common stock ownership of PGE. PGE would continue to be the NRC licensee of TNP and the Trojan ISFSI. In its application, PGE states that no physical changes will be made to the TNP or the Trojan ISFSI as a result of the proposed indirect transfer of the TNP and Trojan ISFSI licenses. Further, PGE states that the proposed transfers will not involve any changes to the current TNP or Trojan ISFSI licensing bases. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80 and 72.50, no license, or any right thereunder, shall be transferred, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of the license, unless the Commission shall give its consent in writing. The Commission will approve an application for the indirect transfer of a license, if the Commission determines that the underlying transaction that will effectuate the indirect transfer will not affect the qualifications of the holder of the license, and that the transfer is otherwise consistent with applicable provisions of law, regulations, and orders issued by the Commission pursuant thereto. The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene, and written comments with regard to the license transfer application, are discussed below. Any person whose interest may be affected by the Commission's action on the application may request a hearing by November 15, 2004, and, if not the applicant, may petition for leave to intervene in a hearing proceeding on the Commission's action. Requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene should be filed in accordance with the Commission's rules of practice set forth in Subpart M, ``Public Notification, Availability of Documents and Records, Hearing Requests and Procedures for Hearings on License Transfer Applications,'' of 10 CFR Part 2. In particular, such requests and petitions must comply with the requirements set forth in 10 CFR 2.309, and should address the considerations contained in 10 CFR 2.309(d) and (f). Untimely requests and petitions may be denied, as provided in 10 CFR 2.309(c), unless good cause for failure to file on time is established. In addition, an untimely request or petition should address the factors that the Commission will also consider, in reviewing untimely requests or petitions, set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(I)-(viii). Requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene should be served upon Samuel Behrends IV, LeBouef, Lamb, Greene & McRae, 1875 Connecticut Ave., NW., Suite 1200, Washington, DC 20009 sbehrend@llgm.com [sbehrend@llgm.com] ) and Jay E. Silberg, Shaw Pittman LLP, 2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037 (JaySilberg@shawpittman.com [JaySilberg@shawpittman.com] ); the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001 (e-mail address for filings regarding license transfer cases only: ogclt@nrc.gov [ogclt@nrc.gov] ; and the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.305. The Commission will issue a notice or order granting or denying a hearing request or intervention petition, designating the issues for any hearing that will be held and designating the Presiding Officer. A notice granting a hearing will be published in the Federal Register and served on the parties to the hearing. As an alternative to requests for hearing and petitions to intervene, by October 14, 2004, persons may submit written comments regarding the license transfer application, as provided for in 10 CFR 2.1305. The Commission will consider and, if appropriate, respond to these comments, but such comments will not otherwise constitute part of the decisional record. Comments should be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. For further details with respect to this action, see the application dated June 14, 2004, available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML041700579, ML041700583, and ML041750439). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [ pdr@nrc.gov] . Dated in Rockville, Maryland this 31st day of August, 2004. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Andrew Persinko, Acting Deputy Director, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. 04-20193 Filed 9-3-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 30 Newsday.com: Opponents say Indian Point nuclear plants make residents `sitting ducks' Frances cleanup By JIM FITZGERALD Associated Press Writer September 7, 2004, 6:19 PM EDT PEEKSKILL, N.Y. -- Opponents of the Indian Point nuclear power plants launched a fleet of giant rubber duckies into the shallows of the Hudson River on Tuesday to illustrate that the threat of terrorism at the plants makes New Yorkers "sitting ducks." The 2{-foot-long, 2-foot-high yellow ducks were supposed to be just supporting players in a demonstration of the plants' alleged vulnerabilities, but a plan to fly a single-engine airplane over Indian Point was foiled by bad weather. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an attorney for the environmental group Riverkeeper, and Alex Matthiessen, the group's executive director, wanted to show the need for a no-fly zone over Indian Point to deter terrorists. As they sat in a rented plane at Teterboro Airport in New Jersey, waiting for the low ceiling to lift, Kennedy said, "When my cousin Caroline was married, the (Federal Aviation Administration) imposed a no-fly zone over a wedding. There's a no-fly zone over Disneyland. There's a no-fly zone over the Super Bowl. But Indian Point is arguably the No. 1 target of global terrorists and there are huge gaps in its protection, starting with the absence of a no-fly zone." z Jerry Kremer, of the New York Affordable Reliable Electricity Alliance, an energy industry group, called the planned flyover "a gimmick that plays on the fears of New Yorkers." He said the two reactors at Indian Point "have multiple safety systems, are protected by six-foot thick, leak-tight, steel-reinforced walls and are staffed by highly trained nuclear engineers and officials." The attempted flight _ and the 48 big ducks bobbing in the current off Peekskill, just north of the plants in Buchanan _ were part of Riverkeeper's promotion of an Indian Point documentary by filmmaker Rory Kennedy, Robert Kennedy's sister. The documentary, "Imagining the Unimaginable," airs Thursday on HBO. It collects many of the claims made over the last several years by Riverkeeper and other opponents of the plants: The plants are not well-defended, the evacuation plans are insufficient and New York City could be destroyed by a major release of radiation. The claims have attracted considerable support in the Lower Hudson Valley, but government officials refused last year to order the plants shut down, as many local officials requested. The promotion of the film also includes Riverkeeper's publicity for a study by Dr. Ed Lyman, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, about the consequences of a major radiation release from Indian Point. The study was to be released Wednesday, and according to a press advisory it finds that there could be 44,000 immediate deaths and half a million deaths over the long term from such a radiation release. The documentary and the study were criticized Tuesday by the plants' owner, Entergy Nuclear Northeast. Entergy spokesman Jim Steets said of the HBO film, "Rory Kennedy is doing this on her brother's behalf. It's simply an infomercial for Riverkeeper." He said the documentary "contains the same claims and baseless scare tactics" used by Riverkeeper in television ads that said a terrorist attack on Indian Point could render the city uninhabitable. Though Riverkeeper said the Lyman study is "peer-reviewed," Steets said it "is similar to previous ones he has done that have been discredited by the scientific community." He said it "assumed a series of catastrophic events that could not happen." "He makes unrealistic assumptions, he makes numerous mistakes in the calculations that he does and he basically ends up with inflated numbers as a result," Steets said. Copyright © 2004, The Associated Press ***************************************************************** 31 Expatica: France's nuclear threat 8 SEPTEMBER 2004 Millions of people in France unknowingly share the same fate as the TV cartoon family The Simpsons: they have a nuclear power plant in their back yard. Pat Brett reports on the history and the risks of France's civil nuclear industry. France has 58 nuclear reactors housed in 19 plants dotted around the country, making it the second largest producer of nuclear power in the world, second only to the United States. In December 1999, two days of severe storms swelled the river Gironde near Bordeaux until it finally broke a dike protecting the nuclear plant at Blayais. The area housing the primary cooling system, a vital part of each reactor's security apparatus, became flooded. The four reactors in the plant had to be urgently shut down. A subsequent report by the government body responsible for nuclear plant security noted poor compliance with emergency safety procedures. More worrying still, it concluded that similar accidents were possible at 15 out of France’s total of 19 nuclear plants. The combined French authorites controlling nuclear power activities recently set up a scale to describe the gravity of any accident ocurring at a nuclear power station, ranking incidents from a minor "level -1" to a major "level -7". There are so many of these banal bulletins issued each year that they mostly pass unnoticed. Many of the incidents described are minimal, but there are some significant anomolies which put a lie to the nuclear industry's argument that a major accident in France is unthinkable - and every major city in France lies close to a nuclear power plant. The French government is now debating the building of a second generation of nuclear reactors, which would replace the existing systems due to end active service by 2020, with the introduction of a prototype European nuclear reactor (EPR) model for testing within the next eight years. While officially no decision has been taken to continue with nuclear power, Junior Industry Minister Nicole Fontaine has publicly stated that "another choice would hardly be responsible". It was the 1973 oil crisis, involving rationing and high prices, which spurred French politicians, across party lines, to clamour for energy independence. Nuclear power was unanimously declared as the one and only way to achieve that goal. In the process, it became a symbol of France’s industrial might. Today nuclear power supplies 75-80 percent of the French electricity board's output and about 20 percent of nuclear power produced is exported, even across the Channel to Britain. Unstoppable in the 1970s and early 80s, every aspect of the nuclear industry flourished in France, spawning Framatom (constructor of reactors), the Cogema (which handles the nuclear fuel cycle from uranium mining, to uranium enrichment, to waste reprocessing), and Andra, (responsible for resolving one of the thorniest issues to face the industry : disposal and storage of radioactive waste). Tucked away in a remote tip of the Cotentin coastline, at La Hague, in Normandy, France boasts the world's largest spent nuclear fuel (never say waste) reprocessing plant. With an annual capacity of 1,700 tonnes, the plant treats waste shipped not just from around France but also from other countries such as Germany or even Japan. Anti-nuclear activists have been vocal with their claims that La Hague has made France "the nuclear waste dump of the planet”. The Cogema, which runs the plant, argues that 97 percent of the reprocessed fuel is returned to the country of origin. But environmentalists dismiss this, claiming that the remaining 3 percent has the highest concentration of plutonium, hence of long-term, high-level radiation. The powerful influence of the French nuclear industry took its first major blow with the explosion, in 1986, of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the Ukraine. The French authorities deliberately failed to notify the public that the radiation-filled cloud had fallen over France. No warnings were given that the highly dangerous radioactive pollution was, literally, raining over east and south eastern France. The staggering excuse given for the information black-out was the fear of mass panic. It was only years later that the true extent of the cover-up, hidden by the shadow of the powerful nuclear lobby, was revealed through a parliamentary enquiry. Following 1986, environmentalists established independent watchdog laboratories and nuclear monitoring bureaux, questioning official measurements. The French nuclear industry is currently being restructured, largely into a single company called TOPCO. Led by the all-powerful nuclear industry "godfather", the Commissariat ŕ l’Energie Atomique, the industry is now redefining its strategy beyond the French market. EDF has recently moved investment into foreign energy distributors, witnessed by its controversial bid for capital of Montedison, in Italy. Besides France's 58 reactors, there are several experimental reactors, radioactive mines, enrichment plants, storage areas, and CEA research facilities that have mushroomed across the French countryside. Not forgetting the waste-laden truck and train convoys, often travelling under escort at night on a route kept secret until the last minute and which, to get back to The Simpsons, could be crossing near anyone’s backyard — as you read this. Updated November 2003 Expatica, Expatica.com and 'I am not a tourist' are registered ***************************************************************** 32 UK Independent: Cover-up claim over report on nuclear power dangers By Marie Woolf, Chief Political Correspondent 08 September 2004 Michael Meacher, the former Environment minister, accused the Government yesterday of covering up the risk to human health from nuclear power. Mr Meacher said government lawyers had tried to suppress a report by experts on a committee he set up three years ago to assess the cancer risk from radiation. The Committee Examining Radiation Risks from Internal Emitters was to advise ministers on the effects of low-level radiation. He said two members of the committee had warned that the cancer risk of radiation could be 300 times higher than previously believed - findings he said the Government had tried to stop being published. With a preface by Mr Meacher, the two committee members published their own unofficial minority report yesterday. Their findings suggest that around nuclear power stations such as Sellafield there are clusters of childhood leukaemia and that the risk of cancer from low-level radiation is far greater than estimated by the Government. They say that the model used to estimate cancer risks, which was based on radiation doses absorbed by victims of the Hiroshima bomb in 1945, is outdated and underestimates the harm to the human body. "Nuclear pollution is the cause of the rise of childhood leukaemia," said Dr Chris Busby, scientific secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk, who was a member of the committee until it refused to publish his opinions. "There was also a sharp increase in leukaemia in children who were in the womb at the time of Chernobyl. We are talking about children in Scotland, Wales, Greece, Bulgaria and Germany so this is no coincidence. The risk of childhood leukaemia from internal radiation could be hundreds or even thousands of times greater than present risk factors predict." The minority report, co-written by Richard Bramhall, of the Low Level Radiation campaign, also won the support of the committee's secretary, Dr Paul Dorfman, who has investigated leukaemia clusters around nuclear plants. Dr Dorfman said yesterday that the committee's decision to in effect block two of the expert views had severe implications for public trust. Mr Meacher, who was sacked last year by Tony Blair, said that the main committee report would "not accommodate a full and fair representation of all views". He said: "This is an attempt to suppress information that is politically and economically undesirable and what we are talking about is not just very powerful vested interests but the health of thousands and possibly millions of our people." The main report, which will be published next month after three years of deliberation, is expected to conclude that the cancer risk from exposure to radiation could be 10 times higher than previously thought. One member of the committee said Mr Meacher should have waited to read the conclusions of the main report before endorsing a minority view. Pete Roche, a nuclear consultant to Greenpeace, said: "Mr Meacher has only listened to the views of two members of the committee ... When he reads our final report he will find that it contains valuable new insights about the risks of radiation from internal radionuclides and does give a fair representation of all views." UK Independent Ltd. ***************************************************************** 33 Sofia Morning News: Bucharest Slams Bulgarian "Chernobyl" Plant [Sofia News Agency] novinite.com Politics: 7 September 2004, Tuesday. Bulgarians are on their way to put into operation a "Chernobyl" power plant, according to Romanian daily Adevarul. Just 100 km away from Bucharest Bulgaria intends to build up the Belene nuclear plant, which was initially planned and will be equipped with Russian-style units. The newspaper points out the worrisome fact that the plant is being built on a sandy ground with frequented seismic activity. Bulgaria's second nuclear plant in Belene was re-launched for construction after a government decision end of last year. It had been set to a halt in 1992 due to protests from environmentalists.[ width=] All Rights Reserved © Novinite Ltd., 2001-2004 - Copyright ***************************************************************** 34 NRC: Tennessee Valley Authority; Notice of Withdrawal of Application FR Doc 04-20194 [Federal Register: September 7, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 172)] [Notices] [Page 54162] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07se04-78] for Amendment to Facility Operating License The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted the request of Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee) to withdraw its April 7, 2004, application for proposed amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-90 for the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN), Unit 1, located in Rhea County, Tennessee. The proposed amendment would have revised the WBN Unit 1, Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.9, ``Ultimate Heat Sink (UHS)'' Surveillance Requirement and TS 5.7 ``Procedures, Programs and Manuals.'' The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment published in the Federal Register on April 27, 2004 (69 FR 22884). However, by electronic mail dated August 9, 2004, the licensee withdrew the proposed change. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated April 7, 2004, and the licensee's electronic mail dated August 9, 2004, which withdrew the application for license amendment. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O-1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/html] . Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to [pdr@nrc.gov] . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of August 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Manny M. Comar, Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 04-20194 Filed 9-3-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 35 NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; In the Matter of Dominion FR Doc 04-20197 [Federal Register: September 7, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 172)] [Notices] [Page 54157-54158] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07se04-73] Nuclear North Anna, LLC (Early Site Permit for North Anna ESP Site); Notice of Hearing (Application for Early Site Permit) August 31, 2004. Before Administrative Judges: Alex S. Karlin, Chairman, Dr. Richard F. Cole, Dr. Thomas S. Elleman. This proceeding concerns the September 25, 2003 application of Dominion Nuclear North Anna, LLC (Dominion) for a 10 CFR Part 52 early site permit (ESP). The ESP application seeks approval of the site of the existing North Anna nuclear power facility in Louisa County, Virginia, for the possible construction of two or more new nuclear reactors. In response to a November 25, 2003 notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, 68 FR 67489 (Dec. 2, 2003), on January 2, 2004, the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League (BREDL), the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), and Public Citizen (PC) (collectively the North Anna Petitioners) filed a request for hearing and petition to intervene contesting the Dominion ESP application. On March 2, 2004 the Commission referred the petition to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel to conduct any subsequent adjudication. CLI-04-08, 59 NRC 113, 118-19 (2004). On March 22, 2004, a three-member Atomic Safety and Licensing Board was established to adjudicate this ESP proceeding. 69 FR 15910 (Mar. 26, 2004). [[Page 54158]] On June 21-22, 2004, the Board conducted a two-day initial prehearing conference at the NRC's Rockville, Maryland headquarters facility during which it heard oral presentations regarding the standing of the ESP petitioners and the admissibility of their nine proffered contentions. Thereafter, in an August 6, 2004 issuance the Board noted that the petitioners have established the requisite standing to intervene in this proceeding and ruled that they have submitted two admissible contentions concerning the Dominion ESP application so that they can be admitted as parties to this proceeding. Dominion Nuclear North Anna, LLC (Early Site Permit for North Anna Clinton ESP Site), LBP-04-18, 60 NRC--(Aug. 6, 2004). On that same date the Board issued a Notice of Reconstitution establishing new members of this Board. 69 FR 49916 (Aug. 12, 2004). In light of the foregoing, please take notice that a hearing will be conducted in this contested proceeding. This hearing will be governed by the hearing procedures set forth in 10 CFR Part 2, Subparts C and L, 10 CFR 2.300-2.390, 2.1200-2.1213. Further, in accordance with the December 2003 notice regarding the Dominion ESP application, 68 FR at 69489 and 10 CFR 52.21, the Licensing Board will: (1) Consider whether the issuance of an ESP will be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public (Safety Issue 1); (2) Determine whether, taking into consideration the site criteria contained in 10 CFR Part 100, a reactor, or reactors, having characteristics that fall within the parameters for the site, can be constructed and operated without undue risk to the health and safety of the public (Safety Issue 2); and (3) Consider whether, in accordance with the requirements of subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51, the ESP should be issued as proposed. Additionally, in accord with the December 2003 notice, the Board will: (1) Determine whether the requirements of sections 102(2)(A), (C), and (E) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and 10 CFR Part 51, Subpart A, have been complied with in the proceeding; (2) Independently consider the final balance among conflicting factors contained in the record of proceeding with a view to determining the appropriate action to be taken; and (3) Determine, after considering reasonable alternatives, whether a license should be issued, denied, or appropriately conditioned to protect environmental values. During the course of the proceeding, the Board may conduct an oral argument, as provided in 10 CFR 2.331, may hold additional prehearing conferences pursuant to 10 CFR 2.329, and may conduct evidentiary hearings in accordance with 10 CFR 2.327-2.328, 2.1206-2.1208. The public is invited to attend any oral argument, prehearing conference, or evidentiary hearing. Notices of those sessions will be published in the Federal Register and/or made available to the public at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and through the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov] . Additionally, as provided in 10 CFR 2.315(a), any person not a party to the proceeding may submit a written limited appearance statement. Limited appearance statements, which are placed in the docket for the hearing, provide members of the public with an opportunity to make the Board and/or the participants aware of their concerns about matters at issue in the proceeding. A written limited appearance statement can be submitted at any time and should be sent to the Office of the Secretary using one of the methods prescribed below: Mail to: Office of the Secretary, Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Fax to: (301) 415-1101 (verification (301) 415-1966). E-mail to: hearingdocket@nrc.gov [hearingdocket@nrc.gov] . In addition, a copy of the limited appearance statement should be sent to the Licensing Board Chairman using the same method at the address below: Mail to: Administrative Judge Alex S. Karlin, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, Mail Stop T-3F23, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Fax to: (301) 415-5599 (verification (301) 415-7550) E-mail to: gpb@nrc.gov [gpb@nrc.gov] At a later date, the Board may entertain oral limited appearance statements at a location or locations in the vicinity of the proposed Dominion site. Notice of any oral limited appearance sessions will be published in the Federal Register and/or made available to the public at the NRC PDR and on the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov] . Documents relating to this proceeding are available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR or electronically from the publicly available records component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] (the Public Electronic Reading Room). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800- 397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . It is so ordered. Dated: August 31, 2004, in Rockville, Maryland. For the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.\*\ Alex S. Karlin, Chairman, Administrative Judge. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- \*\Copies of this notice of hearing were sent this date by Internet e-mail transmission to counsel for (1) applicant DNNA; (2) the North Anna Intervenors; and (3) the NRC staff. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- [FR Doc. 04-20197 Filed 9-3-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 36 NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; In the Matter of Exelon FR Doc 04-20198 [Federal Register: September 7, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 172)] [Notices] [Page 54158-54159] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07se04-74] Generation Company, LLC (Early Site Permit for Clinton ESP Site); Notice of Hearing (Application for Early Site Permit) August 31, 2004. Before Administrative Judges: Dr. Paul B. Abramson, Chairman Dr. Anthony J. Baratta Dr. David L. Hetrick This proceeding concerns the September 25, 2003 application of Exelon Generation Company, LLC (EGC) for a 10 CFR Part 52 early site permit (ESP). The ESP application seeks approval of the site of the existing Clinton nuclear power facility in DeWitt County, Illinois, for the possible construction of one or more new nuclear reactors. In response to a December 8, 2003 notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene regarding the EGC ESP application (68 FR 69,426 (Dec. 12, 2003)), on January 12, 2004, the Environmental Law and Policy Center, the Nuclear Energy Information Service, the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, and Public Citizen (collectively Clinton Intervenors) filed a request for hearing and petition to intervene contesting the EGC ESP application. Their petition was referred by the Commission to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel to conduct any subsequent adjudication. (See CLI-04-08, 59 NRC 113, 118-19 (2004).) On March 22, 2004, a three-member Atomic Safety and Licensing Board was [[Page 54159]] established to adjudicate this ESP proceeding. (See 69 FR 15,910 (Mar. 26, 2004).) On June 21-22, 2004, the Board conducted a two-day initial prehearing conference at the NRC's Rockville, Maryland headquarters facility during which it heard oral presentations regarding the standing of the ESP petitioners and the admissibility of their six proffered contentions. Thereafter, in an August 6, 2004 issuance the Board noted that the petitioners have established the requisite standing to intervene in this proceeding and ruled that they have submitted one admissible contention concerning the EGC ESP application so that they can be admitted as parties to this proceeding. (Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Early Site Permit for Clinton ESP Site), LBP- 04-17, 60 NRC--(Aug. 6, 2004).) 1. Hearing(s) Will Be Conducted. In light of the foregoing, please take notice that a hearing will be conducted in this contested proceeding. This hearing will be governed by the hearing procedures set forth in 10 CFR Part 2, Subparts C and L (10 CFR 2.300-.390, 2.1200-.1213). 2. Matters To Be Considered. In its August 6, 2004 Order (referred to above), the Board set forth the specific admitted contention which will be litigated in this contested hearing. In addition, as was indicated in the December 2003 notice regarding the EGC ESP application (68 FR at 69,426) and the applicable regulations in 10 CFR 52.21, the Licensing Board is to: (a) Consider whether issuance of an ESP will be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public (Safety Issue 1); (b) determine whether, taking into consideration the site criteria contained in 10 CFR Part 100, a reactor or reactors having characteristics that fall within the parameters for the site, can be constructed and operated without undue risk to the public health and safety (Safety Issue 2); and (c) consider whether in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 51, Subpart A, the ESP should be issued as proposed. Additionally, in accord with the December 2003 notice, the Board is to: (d) Determine whether the requirements of sections 102(2)(A), (C), and (E) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and 10 CFR Part 51, Subpart A, have been complied with in the proceeding; (e) independently consider the final balance among conflicting factors contained in the record of proceeding with a view to determining the appropriate action to be taken; and (f) determine, after considering reasonable alternatives, whether a license should be issued, denied, or appropriately conditioned to protect environmental values. 3. Hearing Procedures; Public Attendance. During the course of the proceeding, the Board may conduct an oral argument, as provided in 10 CFR 2.331, may hold additional prehearing conferences pursuant to 10 CFR 2.329, and may conduct evidentiary hearings in accordance with 10 CFR 2.327-.328, 2.1206-.1208. The public is invited to attend any oral argument, prehearing conference, or evidentiary hearing. Notices of those sessions will be published in the Federal Register and/or made available to the public at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and through the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov] . 4. Limited Appearances. As provided in 10 CFR 2.315(a), any person not a party to the proceeding may submit a written limited appearance statement. Limited appearance statements, which are placed in the docket for the hearing, provide members of the public with an opportunity to make the Board and/or the participants aware of their concerns about matters at issue in the proceeding. A written limited appearance statement can be submitted at any time and should be sent to the Office of the Secretary using one of the methods prescribed below: Mail to: Office of the Secretary, Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Fax to: (301) 415-1101 (verification (301) 415-1966). E-mail to: hearingdocket@nrc.gov [hearingdocket@nrc.gov] . In addition, a copy of the limited appearance statement should be sent to the Licensing Board Chairman using the same method at the address below: Mail to: Administrative Judge Paul B. Abramson, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, Mail Stop T-3F23, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Fax to: (301) 415-5599 (verification (301) 415-7550). E-mail to: gpb@nrc.gov [gpb@nrc.gov] . At a later date, the Board may entertain oral limited appearance statements at a location or locations in the vicinity of the proposed EGC ESP. Notice of any oral limited appearance sessions will be published in the Federal Register and/or made available to the public at the NRC PDR and on the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov] . 5. Document Availability. Documents relating to this proceeding are available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR or electronically from the publicly available records component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] (the Public Electronic Reading Room). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e- mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . It is so ordered. Dated: August 31, 2004 in Rockville, Maryland. For the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.\*\ Paul B. Abramson, Administrative Judge. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- \*\ Copies of this notice of hearing were sent this date by Internet e-mail transmission to counsel for (1) applicant EGC; (2) the Clinton Intervenors; and (3) the NRC staff. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- [FR Doc. 04-20198 Filed 9-3-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 37 [DU-WATCH] Dennis Kyne - gulf veteran & anti-du campaigner Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 01:01:41 -0500 (CDT) dear all tireless anti-du activist and gulf veteran dennis kyne, was many of those being arrested in the anti-bush protests in New York. He has to reappear in court in new york, like so many vets he is on the breadline, if anyone can help either with legal costs etc or support then magic. Read his letter below cheers davey (pandora du research project) this just in from Dennis Kyne Hello All, I was arrested in New York during the massive sweeps of the RNC. I am scheduled to reappear in court on October 25th to challenge 8 different counts and I promise all, I was the loudest person there, but I surely didn't need to be cited for acting violently, they buried me into the system and kept me locked up in the TOMBS, the Manhattan Detention Center. This system has no white people incarcerated, however the African Americans in the system loved what was happening on the streets and taught me how to use the phones and got my ass back out of jail as fast as the MAN tried to put me in. Inmates said they appreciated the work of the protesters, fed me anything around that didn't have meat and said that because of the work we had done, the Jail system was free of cockroaches and the dehumanization that we all know goes on in the prisons of America, I experienced no racism in this facility after being warned by police my number was up. So, I currently need to raise money for travel expenses back to New York and private counsel since I am represented by over worked Legal Aid Society attorneys. Below is a list of the work I Have done in the past couple of months, I have taken a vow of non violence and am insulted that the police are insinuating that because I am a combat Veteran I MUST be violent, that is the stigma we veterans live with for our entire post combat lives, and it is not only unfair, as most of you know it is untrue. I fight for equality and justice, and most of all truth, and as a lot of you know, I operate as somewhat of a Lone Wolf because of the intensity under which I function. I watched as police were ordered to drop young women, detain 16 year old boys, and round up chinese food delivery people with the only qualification for detention "being on a bike" while the critical mass folks rode by. It was Martial Law, it is not what I almost died in Combat for. I watched as people became unhealthy in a bus terminal used to detain people, and I stayed with an oppressed majority in the TOMBS and learned that we are all in this together. I hope you consider yourself in this with us. I am asking anyone who can help me with a donation of any amount so I can fly to New York and contest this inappropriate madness, as you can see my court date is one week before the election, and I am hoping New York remembers why we were there. If you see it as within your means please use PO Box 720254 San Jose, CA 95172 Dennis Kyne Please forward this to anyone or all In Peace and gratitude Dennis AP PHOTO IN NEW YORK OF DENNIS KYNE http://it.news.yahoo.com/040829/38/2x3ra.html DENNIS' ARTICLE ON DEPLETED URANIUM http://www.ncmonthly.com/My2Cents.html#anchor800227 ASPEN DAILY NEWS WRITES ON DENNIS KYNE http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/Gulf-War-Kyne6aug04.htm BOZEMAN CHRONICLE WRITES ON DENNIS KYNE http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/articles/2004/08/12/news/uranium.txt GLENWOOD SPRINGS WRITES ON DENNIS KYNE http://www.postindependent.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040815/VALLEYNEWS/108150002/0/FRONTPAGE&rs=2 IDAHO OBSERVER WRITES ON DENNIS KYNE http://proliberty.com/observer/20040410.htm ===== Dennis Kyne Support the Truth www.denniskyne.com ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> $9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/Sj.0lB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 38 Argus Online: Resource center opens for sick nuclear workers [http://www.theargusonline.com/] Article Last Updated: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 - Critics say compensation program in Livermore slowly distributes funds to those once exposed to radiation By Matt Carter, STAFF WRITER LIVERMORE -- Three decades ago, Alex Yawornisky helped scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory carry out the most powerful underground nuclear test ever conducted on U.S. soil. The retired construction manager assisted in placing a warhead with the explosive power of nearly 5 million tons of TNT at the bottom of a 6,000-foot- deep mine shaft on Amchitka Island, Alaska. Code-named Cannikin, the warhead generated shock waves that measured 7.0 on the Richter scale and created a milewide crater after it was detonated at 11 a.m. on Nov. 6, 1971. Four years ago, Yawornisky learned he had lymphoma. Cancer has attacked his spine. The 73-year-old needs a walker or wheelchair to move about, and he cannot dress himself normally or hop in the shower each morning. But Lawrence Livermore Lab officials touted the Livermore resident as proof that a system designed to help nuclear workers with cancer and lung diseases is working. Federal officials last week celebrated the opening of a new resource center for sick workers. The California Resource Center, the 11th of its kind in the country, is designed to help current and former employees of the Department of Energy and its contractors claim benefits authorized by Congress. Yawornisky was able to collect a $150,000 payment that several thousand sick workers or their survivors are eligible to receive through the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. The program is expected to pay out $1.4 billion to sick workers and their families in the next 10 years. After filing a claim in August 2001, Yawornisky was approved just six months later. The money, he said, has allowed him to make improvements to his house that make it easier for him to live. "I feel the program is great -- it's providing the compensation due to those who became handicapped or died from illnesses on the job," he said. But Yawornisky's case is not typical, say some critics of the sick worker compensation program. Critics include survivors of employees whose claims remain in limbo -- and Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Alamo, who spoke at last week's ribbon-cutting ceremony. In her speech, Tauscher praised the employees who will staff the California Resource Center, including director Kris Neely. But she lamented the "long and tough" fight it took with federal bureaucrats to establish the center, which will serve the entire state. Considering the number of nuclear weapons facilities and workers in the state, she said, California should have been the first resource center, not the 11th. Tauscher also renewed her calls to transfer oversight of the sick worker compensation program from the Department of Energy to the Department of Labor. She said the Department of Energy isn't able to efficiently process the thousands of claims filed by workers and their families. A local lab watchdog group, Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment, introduced several people with pending claims. They included Joyce Brooks, who said her husband, Carl, died of lung disease in January 2000. Yawornisky said one reason his claim was processed so quickly is that the government was able to document his exposure to radiation during the test on Amchitka Island. Brooks said she believes her husband, who worked for the Department of Energy for 32 years, became ill after being exposed to beryllium at Lawrence Livermore Lab. But because he was never given a blood test for beryllium disease, his widow's claim was denied. Brooks said because of Tauscher's interest in the case, her claim is again under review. "I don't know whose desk it's sitting on, or what pile it's in," Brooks said. The California Resource Center in Livermore also will help sick workers file for state workers' compensation benefits. Camille Yuan-Soo Hoo, the Department of Energy's Livermore site office manager, said more than 700 workers in California have filed claims for state benefits. The Department of Energy has hired 70 additional physicians to assist in panel reviews of those claims. While the physicians panels previously handled only 10 to 20 cases a week, decisions were made in 200 cases last week alone, Yuan-Soo Hoo said. She said the Department of Energy intends to continue publicizing the program, and that traveling resource centers have generated "hundreds of claims throughout California." A Department of Labor official, Sharon Tyler, said the program has generated 57,000 claims nationwide. [http://www.theargusonline.com/subscribe] Visit sites within the ANG Newspapers network: ©2004 by MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers ***************************************************************** 39 Guardian Unlimited: Meacher rails at 'biased' cancer report Paul Brown, environment correspondent Wednesday September 8, 2004 The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk] The former Labour environment minister Michael Meacher yesterday accused a government committee he set up to assess the health effects of low-level radiation of suppressing a report on the possible cause of childhood leukaemia. He called the alleged suppression "criminally irresponsible", saying he had formed the committee so as to reflect all opinion on the contentious issue and so that a report could be published putting all the facts before the public. Instead the final report gave a one-sided establishment opinion, he said, which did not "accommodate a full and fair representation of all views". Mr Meacher was speaking at the launch of a minority report of the expert committee which says that radiation doses to children across Europe who developed leukaemia could have been up to 100 times larger than suggested by official estimates. The report says that inhaled, man-made, radioactive particles such as Strontium 90 or plutonium from Chernobyl or Sellafield can lodge in the body or foetus and bombard and damage cells. This, particularly in the unborn, would be enough for children to develop leukaemia or other cancers. The National Radiological Protection Board has always measured a tiny dose received by an individual as if it affected the entire body evenly - so the result was a dilution that appeared to do little harm. The possibility that the dose would lodge near a bone or in the brain and emit radiation inflicting localised damage leading to cancer had not been not accepted. Mr Meacher said: "It is very worrying, for it is hard to conjecture that if the [child] leukaemia peak in Europe was real, anything other than radiation from Chernobyl could have caused it." The main report of the expert committee is believed to say that the risks from radiation for leukaemia could be up to 10 times the current estimate. But it failed to mention the theories of the committee members Richard Bramhall and Chris Busby, who examined cancer clusters and concluded that radiation from Sellafield and other nuclear plants could be responsible. Even before the row over the report one nuclear scientist, Marion Hill, who spent 30 years in radiological protection and was part of the committee's secretariat, had resigned alleging establishment bias and exclusion from making reports. She said the regulatory bodies were unable to offer impartial advice to the government on radiation dangers and should be disbanded. Dr Busby said dissenters had not been allowed to defend their views. "The point is that if we are right then the issue of leukaemia in children caused by radiation is as important as... lead in water pipes and petrol. This should be examined especially if we are about to consider whether a new generation of nuclear power stations is to be built." Mr Meacher said: "The idea was to examine all the questions, and where there was disagreement to recommend further research. It is criminally irresponsible not to allow all the evidence to come out so there can be a properly organised, informed public debate." Dudley Goodhead, the committee's chairman, said he was unable to discuss the issue yesterday but would do so at a later date. Medicine and health Useful links British Medical Association [http://www.bma.org.uk] Department of Health [http://www.doh.gov.uk/] General Medical Council [http://www.gmc-uk.org/] Health on the Net Foundation [http://www.hon.ch/] Institute of Cancer Research [http://www.icr.ac.uk/] Medical Research Council [http://www.mrc.ac.uk/] NHS Direct [http://www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk/index.asp] Royal Institute of Public Health [http://www.riph.org.uk] World Health Organisation [http://www.who.int/] [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 40 Anchorage Daily News: Weapons workers' benefits cause infighting [http://www.adn.com/ SENATE: Republicans don't know why Bush is blocking a compensation reform. By NANCY ZUCKERBROD The Associated Press (Published: September 7, 2004) WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration is locked in a rare election-year fight with fellow Republicans in the Senate over a troubled program for tens of thousands of weapons plant workers who got sick building nuclear bombs. The lawmakers say they don't understand why the administration is blocking a Senate-passed amendment to the defense bill that would overhaul a compensation program bogged down by delays and other problems. "I can't fully understand what their resistance is," said Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, a co-sponsor of the amendment, who is in a tough re-election battle. "We've been hammered by our constituents." Many of the workers are from battleground states in the upcoming presidential election, including Colorado, Iowa, New Mexico, Ohio and Washington. "These people are sick and dying," said Terrie Barrie of Craig, Colo., whose husband was sickened while working at the former Rocky Flats plant near Denver. "The administration, the Department of Energy, is just refusing to listen." The Senate proposal would streamline the compensation process by having the government pay claims directly rather than having Energy Department contractors do it and later reimbursing them. It also would move the program from the Energy Department to the Labor Department and require the government to perform environmental studies of plants. The lawmakers complain the Energy Department has squandered much of the $95 million it received since Congress created the program. As of the end of July, the agency has paid only 31 claims out of about 25,000 filed. The $700,000 in paid claims amounts to an average benefit of roughly $22,500. About 135 claims have been filed by people who worked on atomic tests conducted on Alaska's Amchitka Island in the 1960s and early 1970s. So far, none have been successful, according to the Amchitka Workers Medical Surveillance Program. Administration officials declined to comment on their opposition to the Senate measure, except to point to a statement by the White House budget office citing concerns that a change would create an "unworkable process," cause more delays, increase costs and expand the program's scope. Senators say their bill does not add new benefits but would ensure that more workers eligible for compensation get it. House members appear to be siding with the administration. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., said changing who runs the program would cause more delays. He also expressed concern about Republican members in Congress feuding with a Republican administration during a presidential election year. Harry Williams, a former worker at the Energy Department's Oak Ridge, Tenn., facility, said he is a Republican who doesn't plan to vote for Bush this November as long as the administration continues to oppose the changes workers want. "I voted for him last time, but this time around I don't think I will," Williams said. "As it comes to dealing with the working guy, his administration doesn't have a feel for it." Democrats are generally trying to steer clear of politicizing the issue. The tension between Republican lawmakers and the administration was highlighted a month ago when the White House announced the recess appointment of Susan Grant as the Energy Department's chief financial officer. Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., had been blocking her nomination to protest the department's handling of the compensation program. President Bush made the appointment while Congress was in recess, skirting the need for Senate confirmation. The workers were exposed to toxic radiation, heavy metals, asbestos, and harsh solvents and acids while employed by Energy Department contractors. They often were not told what they were working with and did not have adequate protections. "These are our Cold War veterans," said Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn. "They were working in an environment that they thought was safe. It wasn't safe." Other influential Republican senators who support the overhaul include Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, Energy Committee Chairman Pete Domenici of New Mexico, Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens of Alaska and Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley of Iowa. The proposal to help the workers is part of a defense bill passed by the Senate, but it is not included in a House-passed version. Republican senators are trying to persuade House members to include the changes in the final bill, but their efforts have been opposed by the Bush administration. Congress passed a law four years ago directing the Energy Department to help the workers file claims for lost wages and medical benefits under state worker compensation systems. That reversed a decades-old practice in which the government helped contractors fight the workers' claims. Daily News reporter Don Hunter contributed to this story. The advertisements below are not endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News. The Anchorage Daily News - Get the whole story every day - ***************************************************************** 41 Daily Star: Depleted uranium's deadly poison Vol. 5 Num 106 Wed. September 08, 2004 Point-Counterpoint Making of a health disaster in Iraq Ron Chepesiuk Members of the 442nd Military Police Company of the New York National Guard remember the place in Iraq where they were stationed as a hellhole. "The place was filthy; most of the windows were broken; dirt, grease and bird droppings were everywhere," Sergeant Agustin Matos, a member of the Guard Unit, later recalled. "I wouldn't house a city prisoner in that place." And there were frequent sandstorms. The dust would blow right into area where Matos and his fellow company members were based. Sergeant Hector Vega, a retired postal worker from the Bronx, who had served in the National Guard for 27 years, recalled that the smoke 'was so thick, you could see it.' Both Matos and Vega, survived the Iraq War and returned to the US But all has not been well since then. They and other members of their company now suffer from a variety of illnesses: nausea, dizziness, shortness of breath, fatigue, joint pain and excessive urination, for starters. The soldiers repeatedly asked the army to test them, but the army refused. So the soldiers went public and contacted the New York Daily News with their story. Early this year, the newspaper asked Dr. Asaf Durakovic, a former army doctor and medical expert, to conduct laboratory tests on the soldiers. The New York Daily News reported Durakovic's conclusion: "four soldiers 'almost certainly' inhaled radioactive dust from exploded American shells manufactured with depleted uranium." The newspaper's investigation caught the attention of Senator Hilary Clinton (D-New York), who chastised the US Defence Depart-ment for not screening soldiers returning from duty in Iraq, "We can't have people coming back with undiagnosed illnesses," Senator Clinton said. "We have to have before and after testing progra-mmes for the soldiers." Under fire, the Pentagon reversed its decision and began to test some of the soldiers from the 42nd who had returned to the US. But the testing may come too late not just for the soldiers of the 42nd but for other military personnel as well, both from the U.S. and other countries, who have served in wars where depleted uranium has been used indiscriminately. Depleted Uranium (DU) refers to the uranium that's left after enriched uranium is separated from natural uranium so fuel can be produced for nuclear reactors. DU is an extremely dense metal that's used in armour penetrating shells and to strengthen tank armour. Military contractors like to use DU because it's so cheap. Indeed, governments will often make it available for free. Those who defend the use of DU claim that most of the element's radioactive qualities have been removed before use. A growing number of critics charge, however, that mounting evidence suggests DU can pose serious health risks. CADU (The Campaign Against Depleted Uranium) reports that fifteen countries have used DU as part of their military arsenal. In addition to the US they include the United Kingdom, France, Greece, Israel, Turkey, Russia, Egypt, Bahrain, Thailand, Iraq, Pakistan, Taiwan, Kuwait and Israel. The US has had DU ammunition since the 1950s, but it's believed that Uncle Sam didn't use it until the Gulf War. DU has since been used in Bosnia in 1975, in the Balkan War of 1999 and, in Iraq last year. This past July (2004), RAI, Italy's national television station, reported that 27-year old Luca Sepe, an Italian veteran of the Balkan War, was the "27th Italian victim" of the DU used in bombings over the Balkans. It's estimated another 267 Balkan veterans from Italy are currently sick with cancer. It hasn't been proven yet that the Italian soldiers died for exposure to DU, but, as is the case with the governments of the US and other countries using DU, the Italian government has stonewalled any investigation of the illnesses and death. The International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW) noted in a report about what it label's as today's "Balkan Syn-drome," that the " Italian Minister of Defence, refuses to give compensation to their families (the Italian soldiers), let alone to admit that depleted uranium has played a role in these cases. Hardly any information is given to soldiers currently on missions abroad about the risks they are facing, and whoever complains is treated as a traitor and marginalised…." In the 1991 Gulf War, DU was mainly used against Iraqi forces in the desert. In the Iraq War, the Pentagon used its radioactive arsenal in Iraq's suburban areas. According to Pentagon and United Nations statistics, the US used between 1,100 and 2,200 tons of shells containing DU during the Iraq War in March and April, 2003. Today in Iraq, parts of spent DU shells and DU-contaminated debris have been found strewn on the streets of urban areas. Contaminated sites have been marked for cleanup, but at this late date, many of the contaminated sites have yet to be cleaned up. This has created a potential health hazard for many Iraqis. The ICBUW reports that " to minimise the risk of exposure, foreign troops have been instructed to stay away from potentially contaminated areas as much as possible, or, at least, to wear respiratory protection and gloves when it is necessary to enter such sites.' In May 2003, Scott Peterson, an Iraq-based staff writer for the Christian Science Monitor, took Geiger counter readings at several sites in Baghdad. Peterson found that the readings in some places registered more than a 1000 times the normal radiation levels. Three months later, the Seattle Post Intelligencer newspaper reported elevated radiation levels at six sites located between Basra and Baghdad. Soon after the Iraq War, the World Health Organisation and other leading scientific organisations began to warn that children who come into contact with DU-contaminated shells faced health risks. Their warnings were based on expert analysis. "Children playing with soil may be identified as the critical population group, with inhalation and/or ingestion of contaminated soil as the critical pathway," the scholarly peer-reviewed Journal of Environmental Radioactivity reported in February 2003. Since the Gulf War, the US military has denied that DU poses any health risks and has even tried to suppress the growing evidence that DU is a toxic killer that should be banned. As Ed Ericson, wrote in the May-June 2003 issue of E: The Environmental Magazine, the Pentagon, "has cashiered or attempted to discredit its own experts, ignored their advice, impeached scientific research into DU's health effects and assembled a disinformation campaign to confuse the issue." The stonewalling began after the 1991 Gulf War, in which the US and British military forces fired about 350 tons of DSU at Iraqi tanks and other targets. After the war, Iraqi doctors began reporting shrapnel increases in cancer and birth defects in southern Iraq. The suspicion has been that DU may have caused the problems, but the Pentagon has claimed that the charge is unsubstantiated. During Saddam Hussein's regime, Iraqi medical researchers wanted to present their findings at international conferences but were prevented by the economic embargo of Iraq. The US military insists that studies from the Gulf War have shown no long term problems from DU, It claims that its studies show that only soldiers who had shrapnel wounds from DU or who were inside tanks shot by DU shells and accidentally breathed radioactive dust were at risk. This would exclude any of the soldiers from the 42nd who have gotten sick after their Iraq tour. But independent organisations say studies show DU can pose a health risk. In April, 2003, the Royal Society, Britain's leading scientific organisation, said that some soldiers could suffer from "kidney damage and an increased risk of lung cancer," depending on level of exposure. The problem is no real studies of DU's long-term effects have been done. Scientists, in effect, have just begun to measure how much uranium is actually released when uranium-tipped ammunition hits its targets. Without these studies, no way can it be determined how much uranium dust soldiers are exposed to. Until these studies are done and the findings released, it's outrageous that the US and Britain have not moved to de-contaminate the DU affected areas in Iraq and to implement a moratorium on the military use of DU. So far, we've seen a few modest steps in the right direction. In April 2003, Congre-ssman Jim McDermott (D-Washing-ton) introduced the Depleted Uranium (DU) Munitions Study Act of 2003 to the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill calls for studies of DU's health effects, requires the Environmental Protection Agency to identify sites in the US where DU munitions have been used in test firing and recommends study of the water/vegeta-tion/soil at these sites for possible DU contamination. The bill also requires the cleanup of contaminated sites. In May of this year, another bill cited as the Depleted Uranium Screening and Testing Act of 2004 was introduced in the House. It would require the Pentagon to identify those members of the US armed forces who have been exposed during military service to DU and to test their health. Meanwhile, the US General Accounting Office has undertaken a study of the health of DU exposure in veterans of the 1991 Gulf War, as well as the policies of the Department of Defence and the Department of Veteran Affairs in identifying and medically treating veterans exposed to DU. Ironically, Germany, one of the strongest critics of the Iraq War, is sending a team of environmental experts to Iraq under the auspices of the UN. The team will evaluate the policies of Saddam Hussein, the UN embargo and the impact of the two invasions on Iraq's natural resources. The US and British governments have given their blessing to the mission. "That is significant because they will also face some critical questions, such as the impact of using depleted uranium munitions." Juergen Trittin, Germany's environmental minister, told the press. These developments, however, fall far short of what needs to be done to deal with the DU issue. Meanwhile, soldiers and civilians will continue to die from the element's radioactive poison in the wars of the 21st century. This raises a pertinent question: Does this policy constitute a war crime? Ron Chepesiuk, a South Carolina based journalist, is a Visiting Professor of Journalism at Chittagong University and a Research Associate with National Defence College. ***************************************************************** 42 ENN: New UNEP report warns of threats to unique Arctic ecosystem of Barents Sea From UNEP Tuesday, September 07, 2004 STAVANGER/NAIROBI, August 2004 - Overfishing of cod and haddock, nuclear waste storage, the invasion of the red king crab and a projected six-fold increase in oil and gas transportation are some of the issues threatening the unique Barents Sea Arctic ecosystem, scientists are warning. An absence of long-term planning and legislation are the main causes of these threats according to a new report prepared by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Global International Waters Assessment (GIWA), and released at the Offshore Northern Seas Conference in Stavanger, Norway. The overexploitation of fish stocks is "the most alarming problem for the region at present", according to the report. It says that fish in the Barents Sea continue to be over-fished despite measures of regulation and control. Pollution was identified as the next most important concern. While the report notes that the Barents Sea is much cleaner than other European seas, and that pollution does not constitute a threat to human health or ecosystems, it points out risks associated with the expansion of oil and gas industries in the region. Speaking at the launch of the report, Klaus Toepfer, UNEP's Executive Director, said: "The increased exploration activities for petroleum resources in the Barents Sea, the offshore developments and the shipping of oil and gas along the coasts represent significant potential threats to this vulnerable arctic ecosystem." There are vast oil and gas reserves on Russia's Arctic shelf. According to the report, the development of these oil and gas deposits will increase oil transport to 40 million tonnes by the year 2020. This will correspondingly increase the pressure on the Northern Sea Route (which crosses the Barents Sea) by a factor of six. As a consequence, the risk of accidental oil spills is expected to increase in the near future, says the report. It goes on to suggest a set of measures to reduce the risk of potential emergencies, including the development of safety plans to prevent accidental oil spills, and contingency plans to respond to accidents. A third major issue of priority concern identified by the report is the storage facilities for radioactive wastes and possible contamination of the environment. The Murmansk region houses more radioactive waste than any other region of the world. Although current levels of radioactivity are low and do not pose any threat to human health or the environment, there is need, according to the report, for long-term strategies for the handling of stored nuclear material in the region. The fourth most important issue identified is the modification of ecosystems by invasive species. The composition of the Barents Sea fauna has been changed by the intentional introduction of the red king crab, as well as other alien species. There are concerns that competition between the red king crab and commercial and non-commercial species could result in the decrease of some commercially important fish stocks. Another aspect of the problem is the unintentional introduction of alien species through ballast water of oil tankers. Alien species introduced unintentionally form a serious threat to the economy of northern Norway as well as to coastal communities in Russia, says the UNEP report. In response to the problems identified, the report recommends that new regulations for different sectors should be adopted and enforced, along with rigorous adherence to existing international environmental agreements. The report can be downloaded from the web at: http://www.giwa.net/barentssea/ For more information, please contact: Robert Bisset, UNEP Spokesperson in Europe, on Tel: +33-1-4437-7613, Mobile: +33-6-2272-5842, E-mail: robert.bisset@unep.fr. Eric Falt, Spokesperson/Director of UNEP's Division of Communications and Public Information, on Tel: +254-20-62-3292, E-mail: eric.falt@unep.org or Nick Nuttall, UNEP Head of Media, on Tel: +254-20- 62-3084, Mobile: +254-733-632755, E-mail: nick.nuttall@unep.org. At GIWA, contact: Elisabet Idermark, Information Officer, UNEP-Global International Waters Assessment, Kalmar, Sweden, on Tel: +46-480-44-7353, E-mail: info@giwa.net Note to Editors. The Barents Sea report (Regional Assessment 11) was produced by an expert team established by UNEP GIWA. The team was chaired by the Russian Academy of Science and Murmansk Marine Biological Institute in Murmansk and supported by Akvaplan-Niva and the Norwegian College of Fisheries Science in Tromsö. This report has been funded by the Global Environment Facility and the Norwegian Government. The GIWA assessment of the Barents Sea is part of a global comprehensive and systematic assessment of the environmental conditions and problems in transboundary waters, led by UNEP. It comprises marine, coastal and land areas, including ground waters. The assessment is done in 66 transboundary water regions where teams of local experts focus on five major concerns, including 22 specific water related problems. For more information about GIWA see http://www.giwa.net/ For more information, contact: Robert Bisset Information Officer for Europe UNEP [rbisset@unep.fr] Web site: [http://www.unep.org] ENN is a registered trademark of the Environmental News Network Inc. Copyright © 2004 Environmental News Network Inc. ***************************************************************** 43 Times-News: Paying the price? Idahoans could join nuclear 'downwinders' eligible for compensation Online -- Twin Falls, Idaho www.magicvalley.com The Times-News | AG Weekly | Wednesday, September 8, 2004 • Twin Falls, Idaho Originally published Tuesday, September 7, 2004By Jennifer Sandmann Times-News writer BELLEVUE -- The memory is two decades old but stays with him still. A nurse walks into the treatment room. She's draped with a lead vest, like the kind X-ray techs wear, and holding a long pole. At the end of it is a canister, and she tells him to swallow the contents. He's instructed to stay away from children until the radioactivity he's about to ingest decays. The dose of radioactive iodine given to former Blaine County resident Wayne Morrison, who now lives in Boise, was intended to treat his hyperactive thyroid condition. It proved to be too much and instead was enough to kill his thyroid gland, which controls the body's metabolism. He's been on medication ever since. Morrison, who turns 59 this month, considers himself lucky that he didn't develop cancer. But he wonders if the farm-fresh milk ironically contaminated with the same kind of radioactivity doctors use for treatment caused his thyroid problem in the first place. "My grandparents had a dairy. We never bought milk, because we had enough for two families. We had fresh cream, and my grandmother used to churn butter," he said. A 1997 National Cancer Institute study shows people who lived in Blaine County during the nuclear testing era received much higher doses of radioactive iodine than the 21 counties in Utah, Nevada or Arizona whose residents are eligible for $50,000 in federal compensation if they develop certain cancers including thyroid cancer. They must have lived in designated counties considered to be downwind from the Nevada Test Site between 1951 and 1958 or from June 30, 1962, to July 31, 1962. But as the 1997 study showed, the entire country was downwind, depending on which way the wind blew when the bombs were detonated in Nye County, Nev. [photo] KIRSTEN SHULTZ/The Times-NewsTeresa Bergin, who lost her 19-year-old daughter, Rosemary, to cancer in 1979, and cancer survivor Robert Head question the link between the illness and the amount of fallout that hit Blaine County from nuclear testing in Nevada during the 1950s and 1960s. Both Rosemary and Robert underwent cancer treatment at the same time as teens. As longtime Bellevue residents, the Head and Bergin families have known each other for generations. If Morrison hadn't lived in one of the "hottest" counties in the country, he said he probably wouldn't have thought much about the latest fallout news. Like others who lived in Blaine County during the testing era, he finds it disorienting to consider his thyroid problem could be linked to nuclear fallout. Farm fresh Farm-fresh milk was the source of the most concentrated human exposure of radioactive iodine from nuclear fallout. Radioactivity in processed milk or other dairy products had more time to decay before it was consumed. Fallout dropped on pastures. Cows and goats grazed. They concentrated radioactive iodine in their milk, goats more so than cows. People consumed the milk, and the iodine concentrated in their thyroid glands. It's the same principle behind treating thyroid problems with radioactive iodine -- the chemotherapy concentrates in the thyroid gland that serves as the body's iodine processor. Bellevue resident Teresa Bergin, who lost her 19-year-old daughter Rosemary to ovarian cancer in 1979, and neighbor Robert Head, who survived his cancer as a teen, now wonder about the milk they drank. Both families enjoyed nutritious milk straight from the farm. "We were a very healthy family and tried to eat right. We bought milk from a reputable local farmer while we were raising our family. The people took fine care of their cows, and it was marvelous milk," Bergin said. Head, 43, and Bergin's daughter underwent cancer treatment at the same time. He was raised on a farm where the milk was fresh. He survived his testicular cancer, but in 1998 a tumor attached itself to his spine. He also developed a tumor on his neck and two behind his heart. All were benign, but the one in his back ruptured, and he was airlifted for emergency treatment in Boise. About a year ago, one of the tumors behind his heart ruptured. He was back in the hospital. "For basically 25 years of my life I've dealt with some sort of tumors," Head said. His insurance premiums are $310 a month just for himself, but it pays for hospital bills that five years ago reached $250,000 to $300,000. "I'm not into it to recover any money or anything like that," Head said. "It's my past." But he wonders how the government can choose who should get a federal check. "Where do you come up with people who should get compensated and not others? I think they have kind of put their foot in it, to compensate certain people," he said. The money, Bergin said, won't bring her daughter back. "It isn't the money. It's just that if it was the cause, somebody should have been responsible," she said. Include Idaho? As the National Academy of Sciences reviews whether the federal compensation program should be expanded to other areas of the country and include other cancers, activists in Idaho are calling on the state's political leaders to push for the state's inclusion. J. Truman of Malad leads an organization called the Downwinders that has been pushing for compensation since the late 1970s. Having grown up in St. George, Utah, and survived lymphoma, Truman could be eligible for compensation but doesn't plan to apply for the $50,000 check. "Personally, as long as I'm out there as an advocate for compensation I'm not going to pad my pocket," he said. He wants equal compensation for equal exposure, and says asking why there isn't should be the question put to policy-makers. It shouldn't be compensation by pork barrel politics, he said. "It's insulting to us, because we're eligible, but our neighbors right across the fence don't get anything," Truman said. An open and transparent process is needed so that the public can find out what happened, who was affected and decide what the government should do about it, he said. Author Richard L. Miller, a statistician and environmental scientist, has written the "Atlas of Nuclear Fallout." Iodine-131 is the single radioactive isotope evaluated in the federal study, but it's just one of 125 radioactive isotopes produced in a nuclear reaction, Miller said. It took him about two years to calculate fallout levels for 80 isotopes for every county in the country, he said. Idaho's Gem County was the hottest in the nation for about 30. How many of these isotopes are linked to cancer is unknown, he said, and definitively linking a cancer to a specific event is elusive. "An individual cancer cell doesn't have a label. If you have a particular group of cancers in a small area, like a cluster, then that should be a red light," he said. "What I am saying is they should study cancer clusters and include fallout as a possibility." Times-News writer Jennifer Sandmann can be reached at 733-0931, Ext. 237, or jsandmann@magicvalley.com [jsandmann@magicvalley.com] . Cancers eligible for federal compensation * People with cancer who lived in 21 counties in Utah, Arizona and Nevada during nuclear testing at the Nevada Test Site between 1951 and 1958 and June 30, 1962, to July 31, 1962, are eligible for $50,000 in compensation from the federal government if they have been diagnosed with one of the following cancers: * Leukemia (other than chronic lymphocytic leukemia), multiple myeloma, lymphomas (other than Hodgkin's disease) and primary cancer of the thyroid, breast, esophagus, stomach, pharynx, small intestine, pancreas, bile ducts, gall bladder, salivary gland, bladder, brain, colon, ovary, liver (except if cirrhosis or hepatitis B is indicated), or lung. * Find more information online about the Radiation Compensation Exposure Program at www.usdoj.gov/civil/torts/const/reca [http://www.usdoj.gov/civil/torts/const/reca] . Copyright © 2004, Lee Publications Inc. Magicvalley.com is an on-line division of The Times-News, published daily at 132 W. Fairfield St., Twin Falls, Idaho 83301 by Lee Publications, Inc., a subsidiary of Lee Enterprises. ***************************************************************** 44 Times-News: Government ignored public health warnings during fallout era Online -- Twin Falls, Idaho www.magicvalley.com The Times-News | AG Weekly | Wednesday, September 8, 2004 • Twin Falls, Idaho Originally published Tuesday, September 7, 2004 By Jennifer Sandmann Times-News writer TWIN FALLS -- It was July 6, 1962, and a professor from the University of Utah took his students on a routine field trip southeast of Salt Lake City to measure background radiation near various rock formations. What their Geiger counters recorded instead was a national secret that today marks Idaho as one of the hottest fallout zones in the nation under the federal government's nuclear bomb testing program in Nevada. A National Cancer Institute study unleashed the news seven years ago, but only now does it appear to be sinking in among Idahoans. That is thanks to publicity surrounding Utah's efforts to expand federal cancer compensation to more of its residents and the call among Idaho activists for compensation in this state. A panel of national scientists is reviewing testimony to consider whether to recommend Congress expand the program. Robert Head, 43, had dismissed discussions of the possible link between fallout and cancer as just rumors until now. Today he wonders if growing up in isolated Blaine County makes him a "downwinder," even though Nevada is due south. "I think it's good that it's actually coming out, if that's the case," he said. He and a schoolmate Rosemary Bergin were astonished to find each other undergoing cancer treatments in Boise when they were teens. She died in 1979 at just 19 from ovarian cancer. Three years later, her younger sister Margaret developed a benign ovarian tumor, an experience she would face two more times. Today's news about the extent of fallout Idaho actually received has reopened a mother's wounds. "That's what upsets me so, the fact that we weren't cautioned about such things," Teresa Bergin said. The mother of six was devastated by the loss of Rosemary and the threat that the same type of disease had struck again in her daughter Margaret, who survived. Milk-fallout link known early The government had plenty of information to issue warnings about the path of the nuclear fallout clouds and public health risks when it detonated bombs in the 1950s and 1960s, says cancer survivor J. Truman of Malad, who heads an advocacy group called the Downwinders. Truman came across a study in the 1963 journal of "Health Physics" that shows the government ignored scientific recommendations to reduce public exposure. The urging came from four University of Utah professors, who set to work immediately 42 years ago after Geiger counters on the student science outing went berserk. The U of U class under the supervision of Robert C. Pendleton had watched a dusty cloud approach. When it arrived, radiation levels rose to about 100 times higher than the area's normal background levels. The cloud was moving in from the Nevada Test Site about 65 miles north of Las Vegas after the Sedan shot, a 100-kiloton test bomb detonated at a depth of 635 feet underground. The bomb packed the explosive force of 100,000 tons of TNT in comparison to the atomic bomb dropped 17 years earlier on Hiroshima that had an explosive force of 20 kilotons. Following Sedan, the government released four more test shots during July 1962, each less than 20 kilotons. The accidental discovery of elevated radiation levels sent professors Pendleton, Mays, Lloyd and Brooks into action. They began sampling milk and screening human thyroid glands for radioactive iodine, well aware that milk consumption was a high-risk pathway for human radioactive iodine exposure. Fallout dusts pastures, cows or goats graze, and the iodine becomes concentrated in the milk -- in goats even more so than in cows. On Monday, July 16, 1962, the professors notified the Utah State Department of Health of their results and suggested that contaminated milk be routed to cheese, powdered milk or condensed milk to reduce the public's exposure by allowing radioactivity time to decay before the milk product was consumed. It wasn't until the beginning of August 1962 that state health officials recommended milk producers take specific precautions, including transferring cows from contaminated pastures for stored feed and diverting contaminated milk to processing plants to allow the radioactivity to decay. But by that time the researchers estimated 80 percent of the potential radioactive iodine in the milk supply had been consumed. Public health warnings ignored Truman was raised in southern Utah and was among the 700 children under age 2 the researchers estimated were exposed to a dose of radioactive iodine of 84 rads -- the amount of absorbed radiation -- from test shot Harry fired May 19, 1953. By comparison, background radiation exposes the thyroid to about 0.1 rad a year. "Literally the first memory I have is sitting on my father's knee watching the A-bomb go off," Truman said. The 1962 study urged the federal government to take measures to limit the unsuspecting public to exposure. Researchers called for the government to report the explosion time, weapon size and its projected trajectory to health departments and research organizations across the country so that corrective action could be effective. They even recommended better milk monitoring programs and powdered or canned milk for infants and pregnant women until radioactivity in milk had returned to acceptable levels. And rather than detonate during the summer, they recommended tests for late autumn or winter to prevent heavy contamination of crops. They also suggested testing be moved offshore to the Pacific Islands, but bomb testing there wound up causing other offensive breaches in government ethics. In response to its safety recommendations, the report quotes the Federal Radiation Council saying that it "does not recommend such actions under present circumstances." The researchers countered, "For Utah, 'present circumstances,' include an increasing number of nuclear test explosions of increasing size, and a good prospect for numerous repetitions of the consumption levels under study." The National Cancer Institute study evaluated 90 nuclear tests -- atmospheric testing between 1951 and 1958 and underground tests between 1961 and 1970. Times-News writer Jennifer Sandmann can be reached at 733-0931, Ext. 237, or [jsandmann@magicvalley.com] . Copyright © 2004, Lee Publications Inc. Magicvalley.com is an on-line division of The Times-News, published daily at 132 W. Fairfield St., Twin Falls, Idaho 83301 by Lee Publications, Inc., a subsidiary of Lee Enterprises. ***************************************************************** 45 Times-News: Test shot in 1952 hit Idaho hardest Online -- Twin Falls, Idaho www.magicvalley.com The Times-News | AG Weekly | Wednesday, September 8, 2004 • Twin Falls, Idaho Originally published Tuesday, September 7, 2004By Jennifer Sandmann Times-News writer TWIN FALLS -- Most of the fallout that hit Idaho from the United States' nuclear testing program arrived on the wind of the How test shot in June 5, 1952. It was detonated at the Nevada Test Site in the face of a cold front, said statistician and environmental scientist Richard L. Miller, author of the "Atlas of Nuclear Fallout." Four Idaho counties -- Blaine, Custer, Gem, and Lemhi -- and Meagher County, Mont., were hardest hit in the nation when it comes to exposure to radioactive iodine. Much of it came by way of How. Seven years ago the National Cancer Institute released a nuclear fallout study that revealed the extent of nationwide contamination, including Idaho's high dosage. Boise resident Robert Sherwood recalled for The Times-News then that in 1952 his mother who lived in Blaine County had told him about a strange, dusty ash that left an odd residue on the family home and peeled the new paint. The product development consultant and science buff was living in New York. She sent him a jar of the ash, and he took it to the Atomic Energy Commission. "They did tell me it was radioactive. They explained it was nothing to worry about," said Sherwood, who today is 84. He left it at that. The 1997 National Cancer Institute study analyzed iodine-131, but it's just one of 125 radioactive isotopes found in nuclear fallout, Miller said. He spent about two years calculating fallout levels for 80 isotopes from the government's nuclear testing program between 1951 and 1970. Idaho's Gem County north of Boise was the "hottest" in the nation for 30 isotopes including cesium-137 and strontium-90, according to his research. Copyright © 2004, Lee Publications Inc. Magicvalley.com is an on-line division of The Times-News, published daily at 132 W. Fairfield St., Twin Falls, Idaho 83301 by Lee Publications, Inc., a subsidiary of Lee Enterprises. ***************************************************************** 46 PISJ: Ex-resident: Bomb test fallout gave her cancer Pocatello Idaho State Journal: A nuclear-test bomb explosion in Nevada. AEC Photo. POCATELLO - Six-year-old Valerie Brown didn't know what the wind brought. She skipped rope with other kids at Greenacres Elementary and paid little attention to the breezes whistling northbound through the Portneuf Gap. Brown graduated from Highland High School in 1968 and left Pocatello to attend college in Oregon. But the wind caught up with her. Brown was diagnosed with thyroid cancer at age 24 in 1975, the result, she strongly believes, of exposure to radiation caused by bomb tests in Nevada in the 1950s. She has suffered several benign tumors and takes synthetic hormones to help the scarred remnants of her thyroid function properly. She isn't bitter, but sometimes she can't help wondering, "What if I had been a healthy person?" Many Idahoans have come forward with similar stories of cancer, joining hundreds of others across the country known as the generation of the afflicted - the downwinders. The consequences of 90 bomb tests that took place between 1951 and 1962 weren't made public until a National Cancer Institute study was released in 1997. The study identified four Idaho counties - Gem, Blaine, Custer and Lemhi, among the five hardest hit counties nationally in terms of doses of radioactive iodine. Since winds from the Nevada Test Site typically carried the radioactive nuclear fallout, specifically iodine-131, to the north and east, certain counties in Utah, Arizona and Nevada are eligible for compensation. But not Idaho. Many were exposed to the radiation by drinking milk at a young age. Winds carried the fallout to alfalfa fields where it was ingested by cows, distributed in milk and consumed by people, especially children. But despite the evidence presented in the 1997 study, Idahoans still are not eligible for the $50,000 compensation. "With the NCI study, it's apparent the harm was far more widespread than the law takes into account," said Beatrice Brailsford, program director of the Pocatello branch of the Snake River Alliance, a nuclear watchdog group. Brailsford and many others are pushing for Idaho to be included in the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. Dan Boyd - Journal Writer"> She skipped rope with other kids at Greenacres Elementary and paid little attention to the breezes whistling northbound through the Portneuf Gap."> "We're all in the red," she said in regard to radiation maps of Idaho. "Some areas are a little lighter red, but none of us are unaffected." According to a recent article in the Idaho Statesman, Sen. Larry Craig and Gov. Dirk Kempthorne (who was a senator at the time) pledged in 1997 to get to the bottom of the incident. Idahoans are still waiting. Unlike most of the other Gem State natives who have came forward, Brown grew up in Bannock County. "I was born over on West Wyeth Street and then we moved over to Hyde Avenue," Brown recalls. When she was diagnosed with cancer, Brown was stunned and confused. "What they told me was, 'We don't know what causes it, but we know that a lot of young women get it'," she said. She initially thought of the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory and FMC, both near Pocatello, but didn't think much of atomic bomb tests that occurred hundreds of miles away. She also didn't think much about drinking unpasteurized milk on her uncle's farm near Wendell. Then an aunt and younger sister of Brown's were diagnosed with breast cancer. A first cousin had already suffered uterine cancer and her mother was later diagnosed with leukemia and underwent chemotherapy. And last year, Brown's father died in Boise from what the family believes to be prostate cancer. While the exact cause for cancer can be nearly impossible to pinpoint, the evidence seemed overwhelming. When the cancer study came out in 1997, Brown felt like the puzzle pieces finally fit together. Except none of her family would be compensated. While Brown estimates her total doctor's bill to be more than $50,000, she isn't just after the money. "What I would like is for the government to stop doing things to people without their knowledge," she said. "People who enlist in the Army know they're putting their life at risk." "People who are playing in their yard didn't give consent." Brown said developing cancer at a young age left an indelible mark on her life. "It changes everything," she said. "You get a mosquito bite and it makes you wonder, 'Is this a tumor?'" Brailsford said stories like Brown's are powerful testimony at a time when the United States has taken steps to revive its nuclear programs. z "Every weapon is a boomerang," Brailsford said. "This in itself is a cautionary tale when the government starts talking again about nuclear weapons testing." Today, Brown works as a writer in Portland and dedicates much of her energy to writing about environmental health issues. Alleged reports that scientists waited until winds were blowing toward less-populated Idaho before detonating bombs in the Nevada desert particularly rankle Brown. Her parents left the Gate City in 1978 and she hasn't been back for any extended length of time since her 20th high school reunion. Still, she listens to the wind and ponders the innocent years of her childhood. "I've lived my life under the shadow of the thing," she said. zz [dboyd@journalnet.com] covers higher education and natural resource issues for the Journal. He can be reached at 239-3168 or by e-mail at [dboyd@journalnet.com] . issue in SE Idaho? Send it to [schunt@journalnet.com] This document was originally published online on Tuesday, September 07, 2004 Copyright © 2004 Pocatello Idaho State Journal P O Box 431 Pocatello, ID 83204-0431 ***************************************************************** 47 NRC: NRC Releases York, PA., Site for Unrestricted Use News Release - 2004-107 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov [opa@nrc.gov] www.nrc.gov No. 04-107 September 7, 2004 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has granted the request of Molycorp, Inc., to terminate its license to possess radioactive material at a former chemical manufacturing plant near York, Pa., and released the site for unrestricted use. The company used ores containing low levels of radioactive material as feedstock in the chemical manufacturing process. Molycorp has completed site decommissioning and post-decommissioning groundwater monitoring of the site as set out in its NRC-approved decommissioning plan, and the land is now safe for other uses, said Daniel M. Gillen, Deputy Director for the Decommissioning Directorate, NRC Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection. We have verified this assessment through independent radiation surveys by the NRC and its contractor. The property is located in Spring Garden Township just outside York city limits. It occupies approximately 6 acres bounded by North Sherman Street to the east, Olive Street to the north, Hudson Street to the west and the active Norfolk and Southern Railroad line to the south. In a January 1993 letter to the NRC, Molycorp announced that all operations using NRC-licensed material at the York site had ceased. All buildings on the site have been decontaminated and removed, and surface and subsurface soils have been remediated. Based on these actions taken by the licensee, the staffs review of the licensees radiation surveys, and the results of the staffs confirmatory surveys, the NRC concluded that the licensee has completed the decommissioning activities in accordance with its approved decommissioning plan, and the site is suitable for unrestricted release. The NRC published a notice of the companys proposed license termination in the Federal Register on February 26, 2001, and offered an opportunity to request a hearing. No requests for a hearing were received. Molycorp is still actively cleaning up another former chemical manufacturing facility, located in Washington, Pa. Privacy Policy | Site Disclaimer Last revised Tuesday, September 07, 2004 ***************************************************************** 48 AFP: Iran about to renounce efforts to enrich uranium [http://www.spacewar.com/] [http://www.spacewar.com/] VIENNA (AFP) Sep 07, 2004 Iran is ready to renounce its efforts to assemble centrifuges to enrich uranium in order to avoid being brought before the UN Security Council over its nuclear programme, diplomats said here Tuesday. "An accord between Tehran and the Europeans seems imminent," a European diplomat said here on condition of anonymity. "It could be reached even today (Tuesday)," he added. Word of an accord comes less than a week before an important meeting of the board of governors of the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on September 13. The deal envisions a halt "to the production and assembly of centrifuges" of the P2 kind which is used to enrich uranium, according to the source. "It could also extend to conversion tests", which are an integral part of uranium enrichment and on which Tehran had been intent, he added. Britain, Germany and France have been negotiating with the aim of getting Iran to "fully suspend any uranium enrichment activities, including making any components for centrifuges," another Western diplomat told AFP. Enriched uranium can be used to provide fuel for reactors as well as nuclear warheads. The diplomat said the negotiations began three days ago and have moved between different European capitals. "These discussions have been going on for three days between ambassadors from the countries concerned and with the participation of (IAEA Secretary General) Mohamed ElBaradei", he told AFP. The Islamic republic this summer resumed the production of P2 centrifuges, in reaction to a critical resolution adopted by the IAEA board of governors after its last review of the Iran dossier in June. At the beginning of September, Tehran also announced that it planned to convert 37 tonnes of "yellow cake" uranium into uranium hexafluoride gas, an element necessary for the enrichment of uranium in P2 centrifuges. Nuclear experts have said that such a large amoung could in theory be used to make one or more nuclear missiles. Hassan Rohani, Iran's top national security official, in high-level talks in the Netherlands -- the current holder of the EU presidency -- on Monday denied that Iran was seeking nuclear weapons but said it would not abandon its programme to develop nuclear power for civilian purposes. "We've clearly told the European Union that Iran will never renounce its inalienable right to develop civilian nuclear technology but that we do not seek to develop an atomic bomb," Rowhani told Iranian state television from the Netherlands. "We have stressed the solution to the problem of Iran's nuclear program is not pressure and threats but dialog." The United States accuses Iran of trying to develop a nuclear bomb under cover of its nuclear power programme and has sought to have the IAEA refer Tehran to the Security Council for possible sanctions. Tehran maintains that it is merely trying to produce enough cheap energy for its people. Iran is a signatory to the NPT and in December 2003 signed the additional protocol, which allows tougher inspections by the IAEA. The Iranian parliament, now controlled by conservatives, has yet to ratify that protocol. The treaties do not bind the country to renounce uranium enrichment, a process which is also part of civilian nuclear programmes. But the country's insistence on mastering the enrichment cycle, have raised fears that its aims may be military. All rights reserved. © 2004 [http://www.afp.com/] . Sections of ***************************************************************** 49 EUPolitix.com: EU eyes new nuclear package Brussels is set to unveil new proposals on Wednesday amending EU nuclear safety and radioactive waste management plans. In January last year, the European Commission put forward a three pronged package on safety standards for nuclear energy designed to allay public fears about waste management. It included plans for ring-fenced funding for decommissioning, the adoption of common safety standards, and a mechanism for setting a timescale for deep depositories of nuclear waste. But a number of national governments including the UK, Germany, Sweden and Finland opposed certain elements of the directives, stonewalling the discussions. Sources close to the talks told EUpolitix that some capitals had concerns that Brussels would have too much regulatory power - a move seen as interference with national sovereignty. "The view of member states was that they were losing their power to the European Commission," said one. "The ring fencing of funds for decommissioning triggered a hardcore of member states led by Germany which hardened against other aspects of the package." EU energy chief Loyola de Palacio is keen to make progress on this dossier before her term ends in October and has brought forward amended proposals due to be unveiled tomorrow which EU insiders say take on board some of the concerns expressed by national governments. The proposals are expected to be unveiled to the "college" of 25 commissioners at their weekly Brussels meeting on Wednesday. Published: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 11:36:43 GMT+02 Author: Henrietta Billings ©2004 EUpolitix.com ***************************************************************** 50 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca court ruling set to take effect By Cy Ryan and Benjamin Grove SUN CAPITAL BUREAU CARSON CITY -- The milestone federal court decision rendered in July and considered a setback for Yucca Mountain formally takes effect on Wednesday. A Nevada challenge to the nuclear waste project's radiation standards was set to become effective seven days after the court disposed of all appeals. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia threw out the one appeal -- brought by the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry lobbying group -- Wednesday in a one-sentence ruling. At issue was a rule set by the Environmental Protection Agency that would require the proposed high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca to contain radiation to a 15-millirem level per year for 10,000 years. As the Energy Department has researched Yucca and developed a dump proposal, the department has promised to meet that standard. But the federal court ruled on July 9 that the EPA did not follow the law when it established a 10,000-year standard, largely because it did not accept the National Academy of Sciences recommendation of a far higher standard, perhaps 300,000 years. Senior Nevada Deputy Attorney General Marta Adams said the court's refusal to hear the nuclear industry's appeal was another victory for the state. The nuclear industry has until Nov. 29 to file a petition for a U.S. Supreme Court appeal. Nuclear Energy Institute spokesman Mitch Singer today declined to say if NEI was planning a Supreme Court appeal. NEI had argued in its appeal that the EPA started with the recommendation of the National Academy of Sciences as it developed Yucca safety standards. But then it included other factors and devised the 10,000-year limit. NEI, which intervened in the state's suit against the government, said 10,000 years is in line with other waste management practices on both radioactive and nonradioactive materials and it is strict enough to protect the public. In its July ruling, the federal court ruled that the EPA now would have to create a new standard for public safety or that Congress would have to change the law requiring a lower standard. The ruling last week was the second recent setback for the project. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission ruled earlier in the week that the Energy Department did not have all of its project documents in order and that many documents were missing. The DOE is scrambling to submit new documents so that the commission can officially certify them. The commission cannot begin considering the DOE's application for a license to construct Yucca until six months after the documents have been certified. The DOE still plans to submit that application by year's end. The department plans to begin construction in 2007. The NRC must approve both the design of the first-of-its-kind repository and deem it safe before construction begins. The Energy Department's documentation has to be available online on a special licensing network for six months before its application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can be considered. ***************************************************************** 51 St. Petersburg Times Online: Acidic spill tops 41-million gallons [http://www.sptimes.com/] By JANET ZINK, Times Staff Writer Published September 7, 2004 TAMPA - At least 41-million gallons of contaminated water have spilled from a Riverview phosphate plant into a creek that leads to Hillsborough Bay. Another 20-million could end up in the creek by today, officials said. Cargill Crop Nutrition, a fertilizer manufacturer, mixed the highly acidic wastewater with a neutralizing agent, hoping to minimize its environmental impact. Company and government officials also counted on heavy rainfall brought by Frances to help dilute the polluted water. But initial test results show the creek water was much more acidic than normal. The spill poses no threat to humans, company officials said. But it was unclear Monday how badly fish and other wildlife would be harmed. "It's a serious spill," said Cargill vice president Gray Gordon. The problem was caused when a dike at the top of a 100-foot-high gypsum stack holding 150-million gallons of polluted water broke Sunday after waves driven by Hurricane Frances bashed the dike's southwest corner. The water, which Gordon likened to diluted fertilizer, streamed from a 60-foot opening at the top of the stack down its side and into a stormwater ditch that runs around its 400-acre base. Cargill decided to open a valve and release water from the ditch into Archie Creek, after consulting with the state Department of Environmental Protection. Releasing the water, Gordon said, prevents a break or overflow of the ditch, a situation that could cause an uncontrollable flood of polluted water. The company initially put the amount of the spill at only 18,000 gallons. On Monday, however, officials said more than 60-million might be released by today. Adding to the problems, the company ran out of neutralizing agent at some point Sunday, meaning untreated water may have escaped, Gordon said. Additional truckloads of the agent, caustic soda, were delivered to the Cargill plant late Sunday night. Still, pH levels in the creek came in low Monday, indicating high levels of acidity. "The treatment is ineffective," said Sam Elrabi, spokesman for the EPC. The levels, he said, "don't meet water quality standards that they have to meet in order to discharge." At the point where Archie Creek meets Hillsborough Bay, the pH levels were measured at 3.1, Elrabi said. Normal levels are between 6.5 and 8. In addition to treatment, Cargill took steps to limit the amount of wastewater it would have to release into the creek. The company pumped some wastewater to a retention pond at the top of an old gypsum stack that has been inactive since 1990. Cargill also began pumping excess water to a 238-acre retention pond at its sprawling industrial site. The acidic sludge stopped flowing from the top of the stack Monday, and crews temporarily closed the break in the dike. Cargill makes fertilizer at the plant from phosphate. Gypsum is a slightly radioactive byproduct of the process, and is stored in mountainous stacks. Retention ponds at the top of the stacks hold water used to make fertilizer. Gordon said the wastewater contains a tiny amount of radioactive material. The release is likely to result in fines and requirements for preventive measures from the Hillsborough County Environmental Protection Commission, the DEP and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said Rick Garrity, executive director of the EPC. Environmental experts said it may take days to know exactly how badly wildlife will suffer. Waterways around the western Hillsborough County shoreline are part of a highly sensitive ecosystem, said Holly Greening of the Tampa Bay Estuary Program. It's a feeding ground and nursery for redfish, snook, tarpon, zmanatees, shrimp and crabs as well as birds such as herons, egrets and sandpipers. Acidic water can hurt or kill such wildlife. And even if the acidity doesn't prove to be a problem, Cargill's Gordon acknowledged that the spill probably will raise nitrogen levels. Nitrogen fuels algae growth that can rob the water of oxygen or block sunlight needed by sea grass, an important food source for manatees, Greening said. The Tampa Bay area has struggled for years with accidents at phosphate plants. In 1997, a phosphate plant in Mulberry dumped 50-million gallons of untreated acidic water into the Alafia River, killing millions of fish. After a heavy rain Aug. 18, about 4-million gallons of muddy water ran from a retention pond at the IMC Phosphate plant in Keysville into a creek off the Alafia River. Gordon said Cargill had been trying in recent weeks to reinforce the dike in anticipation of Hurricane Charley and then Hurricane Frances. Dominick Gebbia, president of the south Hillsborough-based environmental group Save Our Bays and Canals, said Cargill should have expected a problem like this might arise during a hurricane. Times staff writer Jay Cridlin contributed to this report. [Last modified September 6, 2004, 23:28:08] © 2004 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times ***************************************************************** 52 UK Independent: Iran's offer to stop enriching uranium falls flat By Anne Penketh, Diplomatic Editor 08 September 2004 Iran set the scene yesterday for a stormy meeting of the UN nuclear watchdog next week after Britain and America dismissed an offer that was clearly aimed at avoiding sanctions. Diplomats said that Iran had approached the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and agreed to reimpose a freeze on making, testing and assembling centrifuges used to enrich uranium. The centrifuges can enrich uranium to the arms-grade level needed for use in nuclear warheads. But a Foreign Office spokesman said that the Iranian offer did not go far enough because it made no mention of the key issue of the uranium enrichment process itself. "It's the typical tactics before an IAEA meeting," said the spokesman, who said that the Iranian concession appeared tailored for a domestic audience. Iran is desperate to avoid being referred to the UN Security Council which could order punitive measures against Tehran for failing to come clean on its nuclear-related activities. American officials are pressing for the IAEA governors' board meeting, which begins on Monday, to have Iran declared in violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany and Britain convinced Iran last October to suspend its uranium enrichment-related activities. But in June, Iran violated the agreement by resuming the production and testing of nuclear centrifuges. Enrichment does not fall under treaty obligations, but the US believes that Iran has failed to live up to its commitments to the three European governments and should be punished. The US State Department spokesman, Richard Boucher, described Iran's latest move as a ploy. "What's needed now is concrete action by Iran to end its pursuit of nuclear weapons capabilities, including its pursuit of the complete nuclear fuel cycle that would give Iran that capability," Mr Boucher said. "We believe Iran needs to comply with its promises and the requirements put down by the board of governors. But ... Iran has not complied. "So we do believe that it's time to look at referring this matter to the UN Security Council," he said. But despite the latest twist, Britain still appears unwilling to report Iran to the Security Council, fearing it could be counter-productive unless a majority of the 15 members are united in approving action. Iran's approach to the IAEA came after European Union foreign ministers expressed mounting impatience with Tehran authorities. Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, said after the meeting in the Netherlands that he was "perplexed and saddened that the Iranian government" was sticking to its nuclear ambitions. Britain, France and Germany are drafting the resolution that is to be adopted by the 35-member IAEA board. While enriched uranium can be used in weapons warheads, it can also be used as an energy source and Iran has insisted that is the use it is interested in, rather than weaponry. Again, critics see that as an obscuring policy, to avoid sanctions. UK Independent Ltd. ***************************************************************** 53 Penn State Live: Professors receive $1.35 million Department of Energy grant University Park, Pa. -- William Burgos, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering, and Brian Dempsey, professor of environmental engineering, are part of a research team that received a $1.35 million grant from the Department of Energy (DOE) Natural and Accelerated Bioremediation Research (NABIR) program. The money will be used to research the stimulation of iron-reducing bacteria to promote the in situ immobilization of uranium in subsurface environments, specifically reactions related to a contaminated field site at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The winning proposal, "Reaction-Based Reactive Transport Modeling of Iron Reduction and Uranium Immobilization at Area 2 of the NABIR Field Research Site," was co-authored by Gour-Tsyh Yeh, professor of civil engineering at the University of Central Florida, and Eric Roden, associate professor of biology at the University of Alabama. Ken Kemner from the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory and John Zachara from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory will serve as DOE collaborators. This is the team's second continuation grant from the NABIR program, allowing funding for at least nine consecutive years. "This continuity of funding has allowed us to develop a strong expertise in the areas of uranium biogeochemistry and reactive transport modeling," said Burgos. Now in its eighth year, the NABIR program was established to provide fundamental science that will serve as the basis for development of cost-effective bioremediation and long-term stewardship of radionuclides and metals in the subsurface of DOE sites. More information about NABIR can be found on the Web at [http://www.lbl.gov/NABIR] Contact Vicki Fong vfong@psu.edu http://live.psu.edu 814-865-9481 Contact Barbara Hale bah@psu.edu http://live.psu.edu 814-865-9481 [http://www.psu.edu] © 2004 ***************************************************************** 54 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 17:28:18 -0700 (PDT) IRAN nears deal on renewed nuclear freeze New Zealand Herald - Auckland,New Zealand VIENNA - Iran has agreed in principle to renew a freeze of some sensitive nuclear activities in a move apparently aimed at easing pressure ahead of a UN ... See all stories on this topic: COVER-UP claim over report on nuclear power dangers Independent - London,England,UK Michael Meacher, the former Environment minister, accused the Government yesterday of covering up the risk to human health from nuclear power. ... See all stories on this topic: OPPONENTS say Indian Point nuclear plants make residents `sitting ... Newsday - Long Island,NY,USA PEEKSKILL, NY -- Opponents of the Indian Point nuclear power plants launched a fleet of giant rubber duckies into the shallows of the Hudson River on Tuesday ... See all stories on this topic: SEOUL to explain tests to UN's nuclear agency International Herald Tribune - Paris,France ... Korea will send a delegation to the International Atomic Energy Agency's headquarters in Austria next week to explain an unauthorized nuclear experiment and ... See all stories on this topic: NEW take on AQ Khan nuclear ‘whodunit’ Daily Times - Pakistan ... Review of Books that when Benazir Bhutto became Prime Minister of Pakistan, it was the US and not her own military who told her about Pakistani nuclear progress ... See all stories on this topic: NUCLEAR power surge in the east New Zealand Herald - Auckland,New Zealand SYDNEY - China's nuclear energy programme may spur a revival in an industry tarnished by accidents such as the Ukraine's Chernobyl disaster in 1986, boosting ... See all stories on this topic: CPS to buy additional $160 million stake in nuclear plant Bizjournals.com - USA CPS, the local gas and electric utility owned by the city of San Antonio, will now own 40 percent of the nuclear power plant, up from 28 percent. ... See all stories on this topic: NUCLEAR Weapons: Blair's 'Very Clear' Message to North Korea The Scotsman - Edinburgh,Scotland,UK Britain wants to send “a very clear message” to North Korea that it must reveal the truth about its nuclear weapons programme, Prime Minister Tony Blair ... See all stories on this topic: CHINA hopes ROK nuclear experiment problem solved Xinhua - China ... China hopes the Republic of Korea (ROK) could cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to solve its nuclear experiment problems, said ... See all stories on this topic: CONTAINERS confiscated in nuclear probe Independent Online - South Africa South African officials investigating a local businessman's alleged links to a global nuclear smuggling ring raided his premises and seized several containers. ... See all stories on this topic: This daily-once News Alert is brought to you by Google News (BETA)... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove this News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts/remove?s=92d1672a1b037a07&hl=en Create another News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts?hl=en Try Google News: http://news.google.com/ ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************